Month: June 2020

III Reich não era ditadura

~ Thor ~ Leave a comment

The Third Reich Was Not a Dictatorship, It Was Holistic

Note: This article is sourced from Richard Tedor’s book, “Hitler’s Revolution”.  Noble has edited & condensed sections from Chapter 1.  Tedor’s book has 270 pages of text, supplemented by over 1000 footnotes and a bibliography of over 200 authors, mostly German.  This book is still available on Amazon.  Secure a copy now before jewry has it “canceled”. https://www.amazon.com/Hitlers-revolution-Richard-Tedor/dp/0988368226

For greater context, check out Kyle Hunt’s interview with Richard Tedor: http://www.renegadebroadcasting.com/the-blitzkrieg-broadcast-w-kyle-hunt-4-11-14/

THE NSDAP RE-ALIGNMENT

“In the German nation the idea of freedom has always been connected with duties rather than with rights… The German fight is not a fight for freedom in the sense of being free from duties. It is the fight for a mission in which we try to live up the great duty which we were given. This is why the German nation is the most revolutionary in Europe and at the same time it is the nation where the all-enlightening ideas of inner-freedom originated. We are conscious that the inner values of the Germans, honor, faithfulness, loyalty and pride, represent the best elements of the European races.” -Alfred Rosenberg

The National Socialists government (NSDAP) in Germany, beginning in 1933, began to realign government policies with German & European customs & traditional practices.  They believed their goals corresponded to the natural progression of their continent, and found the diametrical Western-democratic concept to be foreign & immoral.

The National Socialist conviction that a nation possesses its own ethos, a collective personality based on related ethnic (folk) heritage, and a natural ranking within mankind determined by performance, has no merit in Western-democratic thinking.

National Socialism was not a spontaneous phenomenon that derailed Germany’s evolution and led the country astray.  It was a movement anchored deeply in the traditions & heritage of the German people, and their fundamental requirements for life.  Adolf Hitler gave tangible political expression to ideas nurtured by many of his countrymen that they considered complimentary to their national character. Though Hitler’s party’s popular support was mainly a reaction to universal economic distress, his coming to power was nonetheless a logical consequence of German development.

A MUCH BETTER ALTERNATIVE TO LIBERALISM

“The liberal ideology, as a consequence of its folkish hostile absence of barriers, introduced the idea that by the doctrine of freedom of mind and the doctrine of equal rights for all, activity of a political & instructive nature was interpreted completely without any relation to a shaping centre. Therefore, equal rights were allowed not only to a fighter against the state form but, beyond this, to an agitator against the folkdom… The latter had the same rights as one who had risked his life a hundred times in the trenches. The intellectualizing liberal bastard even regarded it as particularly humane to cultivate international world ideas while arrogantly deriding every expression of the rights of his own people.  It is self evident that chaos must follow.” -Alfred Rosenberg

True to the nationalist trend of his age, Hitler promoted Germany’s self-sufficiency & independence.  His party (NSDAP) advocated the sovereignty of nations.  This helped place the German realm, or Reich, on a collision course with a diametrical philosophy of life, a world ideology established in Europe & North America for well over a century; Liberalism.  National Socialism rejected liberal democracy as repugnant to German morality and to natural order.

Liberalism had been crucial for humanity’s transition into the modern age.  During medieval times, feudalism had prevailed in Europe.  Local lords parceled land to farmers & artisans in exchange for foodstuffs, labor and military service.  This fragmented political system, void of central government, gradually succumbed to the authority of kings.

Supported by narrow strata of noblesse & clergy, the royals became “absolute monarchs”, supposedly ruling by divine right.  Common people found little opportunity for advancement.  Only those choosing a career with the church received an education.  Kingdoms provided the basis for modern central governments, but contributed little else to progress.

The revival of learning, with its interest in surviving literature from the Ancient World, led men to contemplate alternatives to the socially & politically stagnant royal regimen.  The Renaissance was Europe’s intellectual & cultural rebellion against “absolute monarchy” and its spiritual ally, the clergy.  Defying religious superstition & intolerance, the great minds of the age exalted reason above all. Awareness of the common man’s latent mental aptitude animated respect for the “individual”.  Liberalism emerged as his liberator from the bondage of absolutism.  It defined the state’s primary role as guarantor of one’s freedom and right to realize full potential in life.

Liberalism’s great legacy was making people conscious of their individual human rights, regardless of birth, and their right to representation in government.  To many, the democratic concept became synonymous with liberty itself.

Hitler gained power in Germany in 1933 through constitutional means, yet campaigned to eradicate “democracy”.  The National Socialists (NSDAP) interpreted individual freedom differently, in a way which they argued was more realistic for Germany’s circumstances.

National Socialist propagandists publicly acknowledged the contribution of liberalism.  The “Die SA”, the weekly magazine of the party’s storm troops, wrote, “Thanks to the triumph of liberal thinking, the middle class, and other social strata experienced a major spiritual & economic impetus.  Many valuable elements that would otherwise have lain fallow and undiscovered were unleashed to the benefit of all and put into action.  It should also not be forgotten that after the wars of liberation (against Napoleon), the best representatives of German liberalism stood at the vanguard of the struggle for Germany’s unity against the interests of the egocentric princely dynasties.”

“Die SA” magazine nevertheless condemned the basic premise of liberalism, “The absolute freedom of liberalism will ultimately jeopardize the benefits of community life for people in a state.  Attempting to place the individual ahead of the nation is wrong… For the individual to live, the nation first must itself live; this requires that one cannot do what he wants, but must align himself with the common interests of the people and accordingly accept limitations & sacrifices.”

Hitler advocated an organic state form.  Like a biological organism, the government organizes society so that every component performs an individual function for the common good.  No single stratum elevates itself to the detriment of the others.  The organism prospers as an entity.  In this way, so does each individual person or class.  Society works in harmony, healthy and strongly unified against external influences or intrusion.

Note: The Third Reich aggressively sought out talented individuals, regardless of their former rank in society, from the bottom to the top (meritocracy), and ensured that they were able to receive the proper education & opportunities to utilize their abilities to the fullest, to the great benefit of the community as a whole.  The Fundamentals of National Socialism are of utmost importance to understanding this article.  Research the fundamentals here:  http://www.renegadetribune.com/national-socialism-the-fundamentals-part-1/

“Every individual element within the Reich preserves its independent character, yet nonetheless subordinates itself to its role in the community.” -Germanic Guidelines (NSDAP)

In Hitler’s words from a November 1930 speech, “Proper is what serves the entire community and not the individual… The whole is paramount; is essential.  Only through it does the individual receive his share in life, and when his share defies the laws of the entity, then human reason dictates that the interest of the whole must precede his interests.”

To organize persons into a cooperative & functional society requires that its members renounce certain personal ambitions for the welfare of others.  Mutual concessions signify a willingness to work together.  The common goals of society, such as defense, trade, prosperity, companionship and securing nourishment, people achieve through compromise for the good of all the people in the community.

Hitler believed that a nation disregarding this will not survive. He declared in an address in April 1937, “This state came into being, and all states come into being, through overcoming interests of pure personal will and individual selfishness.  Democracy steers recklessly toward placing the individual in the center of everything.  In the long run, it is impossible to escape the crisis such a conflict will produce.”

“Die SA” magazine warned that “without controls, the free reign of personal ambition leads to abuse.”

“In as much as liberalism was once of service in promoting the value of individual initiative & qualities of leadership, its ideals of freedom & personality have degenerated into the concept of downright arbitrary conduct in personal life, but even more so in economic & commercial life.”

The German Institute for the Science of Labor concluded, in its 1940-1941 yearbook, that liberal economic policies bring about “the destruction of any orderly society, since persons in commerce are released from every political & social responsibility.”

“(In Democratic societies) There is no longer a sacred moral bonding of the individual person to a community, and no bond of person to person through honor or personal trust. There is no mutual connection or relationship among them beyond purely material, self-seeking interests; that is, acquiring money.” -Germanic Guidelines (NSDAP)

The German journalist, Giselher Wirsing, cited the United States, the paragon of capitalist free enterprise, as an example of how liberal economic policies gradually create social imbalance with crass discrepancies between want and abundance.  “Even in America herself, Americanism no longer spreads prosperity and improves the standard of living of the broad masses, but only maintains the lifestyle of the privileged upper class.”

A German study on the depression-era United States, called “What Does Roosevelt Want?”, stated, “So in the USA, one finds along with dazzling displays of wealth in extravagant, parvenu luxury, unimaginable poverty and social depravity… In the richest country in the world, the vaunted paradise of democracy, tens of thousands of American families endure the most meager existence.  Millions of children and other citizens are underfed.”

Hitler’s own voice on the subject from a July, 1930 speech reaffirmed his contention that a community stands or falls as one, “Our nation cannot continue to exist as a nation unless every part is healthy.  I cannot imagine a future for our people, when on one side I see well-fed citizens walking around, while on the other wander emaciated laborers.”

The June 1937 edition of “Der Schulungsbrief” offered this analysis, “Since liberalism believes in the sanctity & limitless reasoning power of the individual, it denies the state’s right to rule and its duty to direct society.  To liberalism, the state is nothing more than the personification of every unjust use of force.  It therefore seeks to reduce the authority of the state in every way.”

“Die SA” magazine summarized that “according to liberal perception, the state has no other task than that of a night watchman, namely to protect the life & property of the individual.”

Hitler argued that the absence of sufficient state controls in a democracy enables the wealthy class to manipulate the economy, the press and elected representatives for its own gain.  A widening gulf between poverty & affluence develops, gradually dragging the working class to ruin.

“Sooner will a camel pass through a needle’s eye than a great man be ‘discovered’ by an election.” -Hitler

Addressing Berlin armaments workers in December 1940, Hitler claimed that the public’s voice in democratic systems is an illusion.  “In these countries, money in fact rules.  That ultimately means a group of a few hundred persons who possess enormous fortunes.  As a result of the singular construction of the state, this group is more or less totally independent & free… Free enterprise this group understands as the freedom not only to amass capital, but especially to use it freely; that is, free from state or national supervision… So one might imagine that in these countries of freedom & wealth, unheard-of public prosperity exists.  On the contrary, in those countries class distinctions are the most crass one could think of; unimaginable poverty on one hand and equally unimaginable riches on the other.  These are the lands that control the treasures of the earth, and their workers live in miserable dumps.  In these lands of so-called democracy, the people are never the primary consideration.  Paramount is the existence of those few who pull the strings in a democracy, the several hundred major capitalists.  The broad masses don’t interest them in the least, except during elections.”

“Absence of responsibility is the most striking indication of a lack of morality.” -Germanic Guidelines (NSDAP)

The German army brochure, “What do we fight for?” recognized that “Democracy failed because it was a product of liberalism.  Focus on the individual led to self-idolatry and renunciation of the community, the unraveling of healthy, orderly natural life, according to the inordinate value placed on material possessions from the economic standpoint formed social classes, and fractured the community.  Not those of good character enjoyed greater respect, but the rich… Labor no longer served as a means to elevate the worth of the community, but purely one’s own interests.  Commerce developed independently of the people and the state, into an entity whose only purpose was to pile up fortunes.”

“Freedom cannot be made identical to arbitrariness (random choice), lack of restraint and egoistic inconsideration.” -NS Essays

Hitler regarded liberalism’s de-emphasis on communal responsibility as an obstacle to national unity.  He endorsed the words of Machiavelli, “It is not the well-being of the individual, but the well-being of all that makes us great.”

Hitler took the rein of government in hand in a liberal political climate.  To overcome the liberal ideal, which for many was freedom personified, he introduced an alternative state form. It created opportunities for self-development, but also instructed Germans in obedience.  In so doing, Hitler eventually achieved the parity between individual liberty & state authority long contemplated by the German intellectual movement of the previous century.  This was an economic & social miracle; a blue-print for other ethnic (homogeneous) nations in the future to successfully duplicate under the banner of National Socialism.

Note: Hitler’s economic & social miracle was actually not a “miracle”, it was simply the logical result of what happens when National Socialists run their nation without the parasitic influence of International jewry.  National Socialism operates in accord with the Laws of Nature, the natural order of things.  National Socialism is holistic & practical in its approach.

THE (HOLISTIC) AUTHORITARIAN STATE

“Yes, the German people was at that time a democracy before us, and it has been plundered & squeezed dry… What does democracy or authoritarian state mean for these international hyenas (jewry)? They don’t care at all! They are only interested in one thing… Is anyone willing to let themselves be plundered? Yes or no? Is anyone stupid enough to keep quiet in the process? Yes or no? And when a democracy is stupid enough to keep quiet, then it is good… And when an authoritarian government declares, ‘You do not plunder our people any longer, neither from inside nor from outside,’ then that is bad.” -Hitler

“The peoples must decide.  Either they want majorities or they want minds.  The two together can never agree.  But the great things on this earth have thus far been created by minds, and frankly, what they created was then usually destroyed again by majorities.” -Hitler

“As soon as I have finished laying the foundations of the Reich, I am going to step down and devote myself to the elaboration of our ideology.” -Hitler

“The fact that in the new Reich there will be only one army, one SS, one administration, will produce an extraordinary effect of power.” -Hitler

“If one were to depend on the broad masses, then the experience of the child playing with fire, not knowing what it is, would be repeated on the largest scale.” -Hitler

National Socialism employs the use of an authoritarian state.  This is roughly a compromise between the liberal concept that administrations exist to serve the public, and absolutism’s doctrine that grants the head of state supreme authority to make political decisions.  It disallows the majority’s voice in government, but promotes the welfare of diverse social & economic groups evenly.

“Die SA” magazine offered this definition of the authoritarian state, “It rests in the hands of the leader alone.  He forms & directs his cabinet which makes policy decisions.  But he also bears sole accountability to the nation for his actions.  The diverse interests of individual strata of society he brings into harmony and balances in conformity with the general interests of the people.  This is accomplished through the endeavors of representatives who work within their group’s respective occupations, but possess no political authority.  In this way, conflicts of interest & class struggle are eliminated, as is unilateral control by any commercial or political special interest group.”

Hitler stressed that “a regime must be independent of such special interests.  It must keep focused on the interests of everyone before the interests of one.”

With respect to commerce, Hitler announced that he intended “to crush the illusion that the economy in a state can conduct an unbridled, uncontrollable and unsupervised life of its own.”

Under National Socialism, the head of state wielded supreme power.  This was with the understanding that there would be no favoritism directing public affairs, and that “along with the loftiest unlimited authority, the leader bears the final, heaviest responsibility.”

According to “Die SA” magazine, “This system differs from dictatorship in that the appointed leader accepts responsibility before the people and is sustained by the confidence of the nation… His actions insure that the leadership of the state is in harmony with the overall interests of the nation and its views.  The essence of this system is overcoming party differences, formation of a genuine national community, and the unsurpassed greatness of the leadership as prerequisites.  The leader of the authoritarian state personifies the principle of Frederick the Great; ‘I am the first servant of the state.’”

Dr. Joseph Goebbels, in charge of propaganda in Hitler’s cabinet, contrasted democracy with the authoritarian state in a speech to foreign journalists in Geneva in September 1933.  “The people and the government in Germany are one (holistic).  The will of the people is the will of the government and vice versa.  The modern state form in Germany is a refined type of democracy, governed by authoritarian principles through the power of the people’s mandate.  There is no possibility that through parliamentary fluctuations, the will of the people can somehow be swept aside or rendered unproductive.”

The authoritarian state form required that only persons exhibiting natural leadership ability assume positions of responsibility.

Hitler spoke of the importance of finding such individuals during a speech in Berlin in February 1933.  “We want to re-establish the value of personality as an eternal priority; that is, the creative genius of the individual.  In this way, we want to sever ties with any appearance of a listless democracy.  We want to replace it with the timeless awareness that everything great can only spring from the force of the individual personality, and that everything destined to last must again be entrusted to the abilities of the individual personality.”

Hitler spoke of the importance of finding such individuals during a speech in Berlin in February 1933.  “We want to re-establish the value of personality as an eternal priority; that is, the creative genius of the individual.  In this way, we want to sever ties with any appearance of a listless democracy.  We want to replace it with the timeless awareness that everything great can only spring from the force of the individual personality, and that everything destined to last must again be entrusted to the abilities of the individual personality.”

When Goebbels announced at the 1933 Berlin radio exhibition that Hitler’s revolution has “dethroned unbridled individualism,” this did not imply curtailing freedom for personal development.

Hitler clarified his party’s position in a January 1941 address.  “Our ideal is the nation.  In it we behold a mental & physical community which providence created, and therefore wanted, which we belong to.  Through it alone we can control our existence… It represents a triumph over individualism, but not in the sense that individual aptitude is stifled or the initiative of the individual is paralyzed; only in the sense that common interests stand above individual freedom and all individual initiative.”

The National Socialist government assigned German schools to train the country’s cadre of future leaders. “Der Schulungsbrief” magazine defined it in this way, “Education receives the two-fold task of molding strong personalities and committing them to community thinking.  The primary objective of ideological instruction is formation of a solid, community-oriented viewpoint.  Building assertive personalities demands steady competitive performance, selecting the most accomplished, and setting standards of achievement according to questions of character, will and ability.  Only achievement justifies advancement.”

Opportunities for self-development in the authoritarian state conformed to the National Socialist concept of individual freedom; “Being free is not doing what you want, but becoming what you are supposed to be.”

The Third Reich was not a dictatorship; it was authoritative & holistic!  Common interests stood above individual freedom and all individual initiative; yet individual personality was cherished and highly nourished, being that it highly benefited the German community as a whole, and was supported by an authoritarian state framework that was free from the dictates of International jewry.

“What do people strive for who live a free & happy life, and take well-deserved pride in their nation’s progress? A family, a home and children! This is how it has been everywhere and at all times.  A look at the statistics of the 1930s proves more clearly than any election results that the German people were very content at that time, and counted on a long time of peace. Anyone who claims that there was any considerable popular resistance against Adolf Hitler and his government before 1944 either lacks even the most basic understanding of those days, or is a contemptible liar!” -Prince Friedrich Christian of Schaumburg-Lippe (Germany)

“Woe to the people that fails to honor its heroes.  It will cease producing them, cease knowing them. Heroes spring from the essence of their people. A people without heroes is a people without leaders, for only a heroic leader (Hitler) is a true leader able to withstand the challenge of difficult times. The rise or fall of a people can be determined by the presence or absence of a leader.” -Rudolf Hess

Note: In all important matters, Hitler never acted as a “dictator”, he never acted entirely on his own; on the contrary, in most cases his actions were guided by pertinent laws and by agreement with the government of the Reich.  It is known that in particularly significant cases, like the Saarland, the succession of Hindenburg, the Enabling Act, etc., Hitler let the people themselves decide, and then acted according to the wishes they had expressed, either by plebiscite or through the Reichstag.

There is no doubt that Hitler could have gained power in the Reichstag in 1933 even without a vote, but he subordinated himself and his government to the decision of the old Reichstag.  Hitler himself never felt that he had the power of a dictator. He once made the comment, “If one of us has the power of a dictator, then it’s Roosevelt, he has a much greater say in his country than I have in mine.”

Note: An authoritarian state, in its infancy, that arises in the aftermath of a collapsing Capitalist or Marxist-run country will differ greatly from an authoritarian state, in its advanced stages of successful development.  In its infancy, to protect its people from the terrorist activity of Marxist partisans and globalist-funded destabilization & insurgency campaigns, the state must operate with a heavy-hand, which may infringe upon the “freedoms” of the individuals in order to protect the whole community at large.  As internal threats diminish, protective restrictions will certainly subside.  At all stages, however, the leader of the authoritarian state is contracted to deliver what was promised to the people, a commitment that the leader takes full responsibility for, and puts his life on the line to see it through.  If the leader fails to deliver as a result of corruption or neglect, he will suffer grave consequences, unlike today’s Democratically-elected leaders who have get-out-of-jail-free cards on hand.

FONTE

youtube censura remorso lgbt

~ Thor ~ 2 Comments

FONTE
portanto, os malefícios de uma vida transexual não é para saber, não é para chegar ao conhecimento do público. só a parte alegadamente “boa” é que é para saber. um gajo não se pode arrepender da merda que fez porque a merda só pode ter pontos positivos, e se calhar, este homem também está a “incitar ao ódio” por se ter arrependido da vida que fez…

o próprio haaretz (deve ser suspeito e nazi-fascista) nos diz que o youtube colabora com a (((Adl)))
FONTE
foi assim que, por exemplo, há 2 ou 3 anos, foi feita uma purga no youtube que eliminou todos, literalmente todos os vídeos que denunciavam e provavam por A+B a participação dos judeus, israel e mossad no 9/11.

(((genocídio))) nos Sudetas e Cárpatos

~ Thor ~ Leave a comment

Sudetenland: The jewish Ethnic Cleansing of Sudeten and Carpathia

The Sudetenland: Stolen Suffering

“Sudeten” refers to a mountain range 200 miles long and 20 to 40 miles wide, covering the north of Bohemia and Moravia as well as part of Sudeten Silesia. Germans inhabited this “Czech” territory well before Slavic tribes arrived around 500 AD, although major German settlement in the Sudeten began during the reign of King Premysl Otakar II in the 13th century when the area was largely uninhabited and heavily forested. For centuries, Czechs were but a very small minority here.

Sudeten German civilians, on the basis of their ethnic identity alone and although they themselves were not personally responsible for the suffering of the Czech people, were held accountable for all wartime Czech suffering by means of collective guilt. Hence, to this day their expulsion and the severe hardships which more than 3,000,000 people endured, the loss of everything they possessed and the vicious cruelty inflicted upon them in one of the largest forced population transfers in history, is viewed by some, including the majority of Czechs, as fully justified and even commendable.

The unique Sudeten and Carpathian German communities have vanished from the earth. The jewish led Czech government has never made any admission of guilt for their role in this horrendous, flagrant human rights violation. Indeed, the “Beneš Decrees” that granted immunity to Czech citizens for expelling Germans and confiscating their property without compensation is still on the books, and legally the rape, theft or even murder of a German adult or child is technically legal under the law.

The jews artificially built Second Czechoslovak “Republic” was abetted by foreign assistance, support and endorsements which it received despite the xenophobic Benes Decrees which substituted the once harmonious coexistence of the Czech, German, Slovak and Hungarian people with brutality, denial of basic human rights, theft and murder. Benes was determined that his Czechoslovakia should not only keep its pre-war borders, but rid itself of its German minority, and after coming to power following the war, it did that with immense greed. Greed was the strongest motive for all of the expulsions.

Benes constructed his decrees as early as 1940 during his exile, suggesting the expulsion of all ethnic Germans from Czechoslovakia and the confiscation of their property, a cold, merciless solution fully supported by both the jewish led Allies and the jewish Soviets. The murder and expulsions began in earnest when the Benes “reslovakization” programs started in 1945. Women, children and old people paid the price.

All of the pent up rage at the war, the world or simply one’s personal misfortunes was directed at these civilian non-combatants in a gruesome, genocidal mix of punishments. Already, in May of 1945, Czech paramilitaries, army units and gangs of local vigilantes violently drove hundreds of thousands of Germans from their homes and across the borders of devastated and occupied Germany and Austria, torturing and murdering many in what Czechs refer to as the “wild transfer.”

The Czechoslovak army played a central role in the horrors. General Zdeněk Novák issued an order to “deport all Germans from territory within the historical borders” citing the “Ten Commandments for Czechoslovak Soldiers in the Border Regions” which directed soldiers that “The Germans have remained our irreconcilable enemies. Do not cease to hate the Germans… Behave towards Germans like a victor… Be harsh to the Germans… German women and the Hitler Youth also bear the blame for the crimes of the Germans. Deal with them too in an uncompromising way.”

On March 28, 1946, the provisional jewish Czech government formally mandated that all German civilians were to be collectively presumed guilty and stripped of their citizenship and their property. This included the most barbarous persecution and oppression of minorities humanly imaginable: rape, deportations, expulsions, internments, kangaroo courts, confiscation of property and the use forced labor camps. Over three and a half million Sudeten Germans were brutally expelled from their homes and farms. Even very old people much too frail to travel were evicted and forced into an early death. Benes and company applied this ruthless policy to ethnic Hungarians as well.

The still valid Benes decree #115 of May 8, 1946 declared all deeds against Germans, down to the rape and murder of children, were “justified acts of retribution” that could not be prosecuted. This led to unfathomable and sadistic abuses by anyone with a penchant for lust, murder, revenge or theft.

The only exceptions from expulsion were 244,000 ethnic German “anti-fascists” and other ethnic Germans absolutely crucial for industries stolen from Germans. They were allowed to remain in Czechoslovakia and were worked as slaves for their Czech masters, but only as long as needed. In 1946, an estimated 1.3 million ethnic Germans were deported to the American zone of future West Germany and an estimated 800,000 were deported to the Soviet zone, later East Germany.

This famous photograph, above right, which many of us have seen, shows train cars crammed full of Germans expelled from their homes, and was originally described by the government as: “Freight trains full of refugees, 1946. Crowded freight train bound for the Ruhr region. Background, double-decker train to Lübeck.” The bombed-out Hamburg RR Station looms behind. This photo was later cropped, retouched and widely distributed in 1981 with the caption: (“Nazi”) “transports into ghettos and extermination camps.” On the left, Sudeten Germans, some branded with paint, being expelled.

Thousands of German civilians were interned in concentration camps where they were murdered by poisoning, intentional starvation and unchecked disease. 2,061 such camps existed in Czechoslovakia. In the Mährisch-Ostrau camp around 350 people were tortured to death by early July 1945.

Foreign observations and primary accounts document are rife with tales of Czech police looking the other way as guards physically and sexually abused German women in forced labor camps, often to such a brutal extent that thousands of women committed suicide. Even Soviet observers at the time reported to the Central Committee in Moscow that the Czechs “don’t kill them, but torment them like livestock. The Czechs look at the Germans like cattle”

German civilians thrown into Czech concentration camps ranged in age from 4 to 80 and were crammed together in tents or shacks and slowly starved to death. It is thought that approximately 10,000 people died in Bohemian and Moravian camps and prisons from 1945 to 1948 from murder, epidemics, starvation and general abuse. One such notorious concentration camps at the once German town of Budweis was commanded in the years 1945-6 by Václav Hrneček who later fled Czechoslovakia and went to Bavaria where he was recognized by former German inmates of the camp and brought to trial before an American Court of the Allied High Commission for Germany. He received an eight year sentence for his criminal and cruel camp, a virtual center of sadism. Similar conditions were found in the internment camp near Kolín, where internees were raped, beaten and killed. According to some estimates, approximately 10,000 people died in Bohemian and Moravian camps and prisons from 1945 to 1948.

Some people were crammed in freight cars and shipped out, such as the cramped, thirsty transport of Sudeten Germans from Troppau in Czech Silesia that arrived in Berlin in August, 1945. After 18 hellish days of travel, only 1,350 out of 4,250 women, children and old people were still alive.

Many were forced to walk out. Reduced to skin and bones, refugees were starving on the roadsides, with women, children and babies dead in the ditches. Those Germans who made it alive to a bombed-out, starving and already over-strained West Germany were regarded at times as unwanted foreigners. They had to struggle to fit in and were lucky to get even menial jobs.   

Likewise, local Carpathian Germans either fled or were killed in death camps such as Svaljava. 700 people from Theresienthal were taken for slave labor in Siberia, the last ones not being freed until 1969. At the end of 1946, after “evacuation,” about 24,000 ethnic Germans still remained alive in Slovakia. Although most overt violence against German civilians in Slovakia ended in the late 1940s, the years of discrimination resulted in a quick and disparate assimilation.

The figures of Sudeten German deaths as a result of the ethnic cleansing process range from a ridiculously low Czech (together with modern apologetic German) estimates of 15,000, which blurs the issue by distorting the true count, to the traditional standard figure of 270,000 (i.e. figure from the Sudetendeutsche Landsmannschaft) which stood for almost half a century. Likewise, figures from the Brünn death march alone range an older figure of 20,000 to an unrealistic low today of 800. Of the several thousands who died in the process of ethnic cleansing, some sources state that 16,000 alone were documented as dying from direct violent deaths and 6,000 from “suicides’ ‘ during the expulsion, with thousands more died from hunger and illness as a consequence. Like jewish Allied bombing mortality figures, they are constantly being revised downward and never readjusted as higher.

The Germanic villagers living for centuries along the sections of ancient salt routes through the present day Czech Republic were all rounded up and either murdered or exiled, their homes and farms brazenly stolen. The place names of German villages and cities in these areas were all changed, and their histories subsequently stolen, erased or rewritten. An example is the farming village of BoemishRoerhren, a centuries-old resting and watering place for salt trade horses going from Passau to Prachatitz to exchange salt for wheat and barley. The village was laid out facing the morning sun against the mountain. The Germans were brutally expelled in 1944 at sunrise.

In 1945 Budweis, now “České Budějovice,” the entire ethnic German population living in the city was forced to assemble. Some were murdered outright, and the rest were forced into exile under horrible conditions, leaving their homes, farms and businesses behind. Today, Budweis is part of the present day Czech Republic with its German heritage rewritten as Czech.

Even small hamlets were cleansed of their German histories. For well over 700 years, German-speaking people had inhabited Zuckmantel, the birthplace of Franz Schubert’s mother Maria Vietz (1756-1812) until the very last remnants of them were cruelly driven out at the end of World War Two between December and January of 1946. Their new Czech masters almost overnight, by gun point, issued the following directive upon banishing them: that the inhabitants must leave their houses “completely furnished; curtains, carpets, lamps, bed linen… with beds to be freshly made for 2 persons per home. The luggage may not be packed in carpets and coats…. Certified luggage for a person : 30 kg and 10 kg hand baggage. All else is to be left in the home!”

These citizens were never repaid for the theft of their homes and properties. Zuckmantel (now “Zlate Hory”) was the home of Schubert’s father, Franz Theodor Schubert. He moved in 1783 from German-speaking Neudorf near Mährisch-Schönberg in the Sudetenland to Vienna. There also were genocidal expulsions here after the war’s end.   

The ethnic and cultural face of the whole land was changed, even in the smallest of villages and the most remote hilltop hamlets. For example, the German population was expelled and replaced by Poles on the rugged northern Silesian side of the Riesenberg mountain range and by Czechs on the southern Bohemian side. The brutal ethnic cleansing program innocuously termed a “population exchange” led to a decline of the cultural landscape, and in many large parts of the mountains, the meadows went to seed, settlements vanished and hundreds of traditional mountain houses, chapels and monuments decayed or were destroyed because they were German in origin.

“Liberec will never again be Reichenberg. We will clear Liberec of the German enemies, and we will do it so thoroughly that not the smallest place will remain where the German seed could grow once more. We shall expel all the Germans, we shall confiscate their property, we shall de-nationalize not only the town but the whole area. so that the victorious spirit of Slavdom shall permeate the country from the frontier range to the interior. The government is determined to settle the question of the Germans uncompromisingly and unflinchingly. We are aware that, in the West, various reactionary protectors of the Germans are at work. But the government will not be misled or softened by any pressure, any campaigns, any libellous attacks. It is for us a decisive and encouraging fact that the Soviet Union stands by us in the question of transferring the Germans, and that Marshal Stalin himself has the greatest possible understanding for our endeavors to get rid of the Germans. We will not allow even some hundreds of thousands of Germans to remain in this country. We do not want any Germans along our north-western frontier, we want Czechoslovakia to form one integrally Slav territory with Poland and the Soviet Union.” Kopecky, the Stalinist Minister of Propaganda in the Czech cabinet, stated in a speech at Reichenberg (now “Liberec”) on July 25, 1945. And, Jan Masaryk, son of Czech founding president Tomáš Masaryk, boasted that the Czech nation was finally “over with the Germans of Czechoslovakia… There is no possible way to get us to live under the same umbrella again.”

Gablonz an der Neiße in northern Bohemia was the second largest town of the Reichenberg Region and it had for centuries a large German majority, mainly glass blowers and glass workers. After the Czech decree that all property belonging to the “German Race” be confiscated without compensation, many of the Germans who were expelled from Gablonz (now “Jablonec”) migrated near to the old Bavarian town of Kaufbeuren where they founded the township of Neugablonz.

That some Czechs, in the same manner as some Poles, Yugoslavians and others who in this manner acquired German properties, have literally buried evidence of their own complicity in the ethnic killings and expulsions while demanding blood money from the German government for themselves as restitution and reparations, is unconscionable. Regardless of whether ‘only’ 20,000 were killed in the expulsions or 250,000, the fact remains that jewish led Czechoslovaks ultimately destroyed an entire ethnic community of more than 3,000,000 civilians which, by standards involving any other ethnic group other than Germans, would constitute genocide. Budweiss and Gablonz, above.

FONTE