"Why We Should Upset the Germans" - Daily Mail Article

[Guest exuser1]

I must say though back in the 1970s early 1980s in Hamburg and Berlin with a few beers it was not always that difficult to find a few lads who had a hankering back for the old days .

[Khaki]

To the victims of tyranny there is no time limit on grief or hatred and if forgiveness is hard to find, should we be surprised?

khaki

[PMHart]

As Khaki nobly says we should not be surprised that there is no time limit on grief or hatred to the victims of tyranny. As however I refuse to accept personally the retrospective guilt for those occasional acts of tyranny or brutality of which the British Empire was guilty in Africa, India and the Far East, I am therefore happy to let contemporary Germans have a clean slate and treat them on their merits.

Pete

[healdav]

I have got no intention of deliberately upseting Germans and the DM obviously is following its own political agenda.

I oppose the 'Iions led by donkeys' and 'senseless slaughter' stance and what I really want from the 100th aniversary is that the case for British participation in the Great War to get presented even though I don't even accept that Germany should be deemed to have exclusive 'war guilt'.

And I don't expect any German living today to be judged for events that happened long before they were born: Just as I refuse to take any responsibility for (say) the Amiritsar Massacre of 1922, being a British chap born in 1961.

What I would really like to know from any German GWF pals or pals who are living there or who visit Germany, are there many Germans who are offended by the fact that the 100th anniversary is being marked?

Regards, Michael Bully

I have yet to meet a German (and I have had many colleagues who are German and have many friends who are German) who are upset or offended by the 100th commemorations. They just cannot understand why the British are so utterly obsessed by WW2 and have to have documentaries on TV (for example) every week.

My usual line is that it was the last hurrah of the Empire, and thus of Britain as top dog, and ever since Britain has been trying to find something to replace the glory. Of course, the EU could have replaced the Empire (the other countries really did expect Britain to take charge in 1973/74 - I was one of the first British to work for the Commission) , but we all know the history of Britain and the EU.

[lionboxer]

As far as my limited education knows the British ruled it's empire by subjection not by eradication. Atrocities were a consequence not an intention, not that that mattered to those who were effected. We should be rightly proud of our armed struggle in two world wars but that's not to say we should rub the modern day Germans (and Japanese) noses in it. All younger generations should be taught and reminded of the consequences of extremism, from whatever source, so that it doesn't gain a foothold causing future tragedies.

Lionboxer

[George Armstrong Custer]

I am therefore happy to let contemporary Germans have a clean slate and treat them on their merits.

I don't think anyone's argued otherwise, me old BMF. What's at issue is whether we shut up about Britain's hard-won achievement in a necessary war to remove the German invader from France and Belgium, thereby preventing the establishment of a militaristic, proto-fascistic Imperial German hegemony in Europe and a consequent threat to British interests. No one would argue that it would be ludicrous to visit the sins of Imperial or Nazi Germany on today's Germany - but that's an entirely different matter from airbrushing or reducing the retelling of Britain's costly achievement during the Great War centenaries because of some specious fear that some contemporary Germans might not care to hear it.

Milk Carrier George

[Steven Broomfield]

Of course, the EU could have replaced the Empire (the other countries really did expect Britain to take charge in 1973/74 - I was one of the first British to work for the Commission) , but we all know the history of Britain and the EU.

Much as I like the thought of Her Majesty as ruler over her French and German Dominions, I suspect de Gaulle and Adenaeur might have had some objections.

Presumably that wasn't what you meant, but I think Gaitskell's objections are still valid - 1,000 years of history abandoned for an ideal.

[SiegeGunner]

No one would argue that it would be ludicrous to visit the sins of Imperial or Nazi Germany on today's Germany ...

I would .... but then I make a very clear distinction between individual modern Germans, who bear no personal responsibility for the events of the first half of the 20th century, and the state of Germany, which I believe must bear the mark of Cain for ever. Human history is not some sort of computer game where previous sessions are periodically erased and forgotten and play resumes on a 'clean slate'.

I have watched British war films, particularly Sunday matinee films of the 1950s (which are still shown regularly today), with German friends, and they have generally been surprised at the tenor of them and the often sympathetic treatment of the Germans. 'Die Brücke' has nothing to compare with the anguished face of Jack Hawkins in The Cruel Sea and the line 'It's the war, the bloody war". Do "shoot 'em up" type games sell less well in Germany than elsewhere? I don't know, but I've watched 'Waterloo', 'Gladiator' and 'Lord of the Rings' with German friends and not been asked "Why do you watch such things?".

What does utterly baffle, and often greatly upset, Germans today, in my experience, is the predilection of some people for dressing up in Nazi-era uniforms (especially the natty black ones) and regalia and 're-enacting' events, ceremonies, etc. Even 'technical' appreciation of the military achievements of the likes of Michael Wittman, Otto Skorzeny or Jochen Peiper, who developed tactics that were later adopted in other countries' armies, is viewed with considerable suspicion.

At root, the problem is that we are inclined, for our own good reasons, to look to the past and the Germans are disposed, for their own good reasons, to live in the present and look resolutely to the future .... and I think that will always be so.

[Bingo794]

I was in Lidice a couple of weeks ago and i think the relatives of the massacred there may not agree with several of your comments. No less than those survivors or the many other relatives still alive today who suffered terribly under the German jack boot and please, no it was not just the SS and Gestapo who carried out these appalling crimes, ask the people of Vinck. Speak to your own nationals who lost their relatives to the forced labour camps etc etc.

It is easy for the European politically correct to say forgive and forget, but not for many of the relatives of the abused and fallen it isn't! No less than the recently inaugurated Bomber Command memorial which so upset the population of Germany!! Did they bleat for us when our cities and towns were bombed?? Of course not. When the going was good fine but when Germany reaped the whirlwind??

We all have our private views and mine is simply my response to your particular pc point of view.

Nice one, Chris.

I was in Oradour sur Glane last year, this came to mind while reading your post.

I must agree with what you say, though there was a noticable amount of reconcilliation and a forgiving attitude among the people of the village that had lost family or friends in the massacre of 20th June, 1944. Even toward the veterans of the Das Reich Division who perpetrated the events of that day.

As my Old Pop used to say, the words of Mr. Harris, 'they reaped the whirlwind'........Dad was one of the men handing out 'the whirlwind' and was staying in Hull at the time of the Blitz on the city. He had first hand knowledge of both aspects, plus lost friends to other atrocities. A crew hanged after escaping a shot down aircraft, one of whom was a friend from school.

Today, many of the old guard are no longer with us and numbers are dwindling. Reconcilliation and forgiveness should be the keywords........though, no-one can forget.

I have many German friends and they are of the same opinion.

No-one likes to have their nose rubbed in the mess created by our histories.

As for PC attitudes.......keep them, they really are a type of modern propaganda trumped up by little Goebels types. People who don't have a real job and want to pump themselves up to be something they are not

Richard Whitworth

[Bingo794]

I must say though back in the 1970s early 1980s in Hamburg and Berlin with a few beers it was not always that difficult to find a few lads who had a hankering back for the old days .

I had the same experience in Munich and Dusseldorf.....though, they soon saw the error of their ways

Richard Whitworth

[George Armstrong Custer]

I would .... but then I make a very clear distinction between individual modern Germans, who bear no personal responsibility for the events of the first half of the 20th century, and the state of Germany, which I believe must bear the mark of Cain for ever. Human history is not some sort of computer game where previous sessions are periodically erased and forgotten and play resumes on a 'clean slate'.

A fair point, Mick, and I ought more accurately to have said 'today's Germans' rather than 'today's Germany', as the State remains part of an historical continuum, regardless of which faction of the day is running it.

[Bingo794]

Why not? It is different generations today - why would we need to pretend that previous generations were all equally victims in futile wars, rather than that German aggression was necessarily confronted twice in the 20th century and, thankfully, defeated?

Spot on!

[Bingo794]

Unfortunately you cant get away from the fact that “national traits” are often a reality rather than a fiction to be mocked by small “l” liberals. Here in the British Isles we are cursed with reputations for the English being football hooligans, the Scots being drunks, the Irish being “tic”, and the Welsh being, well, Welsh. To what degree these perceptions are true is debatable of course.

The Germans have, in the recent past, demonstrated an enthusiasm for starting wars which kill millions, and murdering further millions of civilians. I suspect that the German enthusiasm for genocide will be perceived to be a national trait which will linger rather longer than a couple of generations.

Tom

OOUUUCH!

[Rockdoc]

I don't see why the responsibility of the various governments for the origins of WW1 cannot be made clear, nor the effects during and after it but we may, with our inevitable Anglo-centric viewpoint, forget that the PBI on all sides had a bad time of it. Almost by definition, war tends to be futile but equating numbers of casualties with futility on a simple basis is insupportable.

Take an example: many men died trying to take Petite Couronne, on the Doiran front in Serbia. It was an extremely difficult target, well defended and with limited approaches but its tactical importance was immense. It had oversight of and could enfilade many British positions. It was never taken but does that mean we should have tried once, failed and given up? Or never to have tried at all because it was too difficult? I have stood in the British area and tried to imagine the scene during the war, with no vegetation and, therefore, no cover at all. Petite Couronne was important. Its capture would have critically damaged the Bulgarian defences since we would then have been able to enfilade most of their front line and been able to approach those front lines much more easily. Many men died trying to capture it but to call their sacrifice futile is to debase their bravery, not to mention the skill and determination of the Bulgarian and German troops who'd built the defences and manned them.

You can't run away from the fact that Imperial Germany had planned for a large-scale war in Europe and was only waiting for a suitable trigger. If it hadn't been Sarajevo it would have been something else. Neither can you run away from the suffering of all the civilian populations of the Central Powers by the end of the war - and much more. There is a story that needs to be told, unvarnished but with tact. There will be plenty of blame and shame to go round but debasing facts to appease modern sensibilities shouldn't happen, though it appears it will.

Keith

[Chris_Baker]

To what extent was Britain entirely innocent of blame? You might argue that it greatly fuelled the pre-war arms race. It was also quick enough to see opportunities for annexations of territory in Africa and the Middle East. And what of our allies? Were they not also "waiting for a suitable trigger"? By all means discuss and record Germany and Austria-Hungary's role in all of it, but if we are to do that we must also be truthful to ourselves, surely.

[Steven Broomfield]

And, of course, the use of "Nazi" rather than "German" when speaking of WW2, as if the Nazis and the Germans were completely separate species. We seldom refer to Italians as "The Fascists", and I have no idea what we could use instead of "Japanese". Similarly, Russia might be "The USSR", but never "The Communists". Why, then, we have managed to reach a situation where many media outlets refer to events in such a way escapes me and (dare I say) appears to act as an apologia for what happened from the mid-30's.

[Rockdoc]

Agreed, Chris. I did not intend to imply that the Entente Powers were blameless. I'm sure the French government were itching to get back Alsace and Lorraine and would have welcomed any opportunity to begin a war of liberation, as they would have seen it. Britain felt it needed the capability to defend itself from an attack by a combined force from the Continent and its weapons programme and diplomacy were built on that premise. We may not have desired a war across the channel but we were certainly going to have something to say when it did come about. As I wrote before, there would be plenty of blame and shame to go round without distorting anything.

Keith

[George Armstrong Custer]

When you talk of British 'blame', Chris, are you suggesting a form of moral equivalency between Britain and Imperial Germany in August 1914? As I noted a couple of posts back, one of Britain's motives was protecting her national interests - nothing surprising or reprehensible, there, I would have thought, given that Britain was looking to defend those interests.

You mention the arms race - almost entirely naval - between Britain and Imperial Germany. I'm not sure you can convincingly argue that Britain's desire to maintain that status quo was something she should be blamed for in so far as the coming of the Great War was concerned. The key difference was that by 1914 Britain had maintained the Pax Britannica over the world's maritime trade routes for almost a century after the close of the Napoleonic Wars. She was, like it or not, the world's superpower and policeman in a way not dissimilar from America today. Whether you agree with that or not, then and now, I'd argue that it's preferable to live under the aegis of a superpower of the nature of the British Empire or the USA, than a would be usurper of that status quo like Imperial Germany or the Soviet Union or China. Britain's interest in 1914 was in maintaining the peace. Germany's lay in disturbing it - as she had done since the Prussian-Danish Wars of 1848-51 and 1864.

The unification of Germany under Prussia further destabilised the European balance of power established under the Congress of Vienna after the Napoleonic Wars, and which had been underpinned by the Pax Britannica under the aegis of the supremacy of the Royal Navy. The consequences of this destabilisation were the Franco-Prussian war of 1870-1, which saw the ascendant Germany reduce France to the status of a second rate power - and in which conflict France had indeed, as in 1914, been as much looking for 'a suitable trigger' as Germany. Britain's position in both 1870 and 1914 was entirely different. The German naval arms race with Britain which followed seemed to British observers to be a preparation to put Germany in the position of being able to do something similar to Britain - thereby extending the continental disruption to the sphere of the Pax Britannica in the world's maritime trade routes. And in August 1914 many in Britain saw that if France fell then, unlike 1871, Germany's newly achieved naval power would ensure that this time the consequences for British interests were serious in that Germany would have the potential - and the access of French naval bases on the Channel and Atlantic seaboard - to turn its attention to threatening or destroying Britain's naval supremacy and reducing her in turn to a second rate power.

It's difficult to see how you could argue that Britain's reactive endeavours to block such perceived German ambitions put her anywhere near Germany so far as any 'blame game' for the war is concerned. And that, of course, is before we get to the nature of the regimes and some of the behaviour engendered by a proto-fascistic German militarism of her armies in the field. Self-flagelation and preaching a doctrine of moral equivalency may be fashionable amongst some in Britain today, but in large part the historical record does not support them.

[SiegeGunner]

I was in Oradour sur Glane last year, this came to mind while reading your post. I must agree with what you say, though there was a noticable amount of reconcilliation and a forgiving attitude among the people of the village that had lost family or friends in the massacre of 20th June, 1944. Even toward the veterans of the Das Reich Division who perpetrated the events of that day.

Reaction to the atrocity must inevitably have been coloured (and still be influenced today) by the fact that Diekmann was killed in Normandy very soon afterwards, so was not around to be held to account, and that several of the Germans tried for their involvement in the massacre (in 1954, if I'm not mistaken) came from Alsace/Lorraine.

After last year's commemoration of the battle of Aubers Ridge at Fromelles, I spoke to a local man, who I think was himself a veteran of one or more of France's colonial wars, about the possibility of involving German participants in future commemorative events. His response was that since the generation concerned was now gone, and folk memory of the Germans during the Great War was comparatively sympathetic, he would in theory be amenable to 'making peace' with the Germans of 1914-18 .... but his own experiences as a boy under the WW2 Occupation, and the treatment of his father, and others he knew, as forced labourers in Germany, would make it difficult, in practice, for him to be reconciled over WW1 while grievances and painful memories from WW2 still rankled. This view, which I suspect will be widely held (and probably not only by older people), was perhaps already in his mind, as the Aubers Ridge anniversary, 9 May, falls immediately after VE Day, which he had commemorated only the day before.

[Bingo794]

Reaction to the atrocity must inevitably have been coloured (and still be influenced today) by the fact that Diekmann was killed in Normandy very soon afterwards, so was not around to be held to account, and that several of the Germans tried for their involvement in the massacre (in 1954, if I'm not mistaken) came from Alsace/Lorraine.

After last year's commemoration of the battle of Aubers Ridge at Fromelles, I spoke to a local man, who I think was himself a veteran of one or more of France's colonial wars, about the possibility of involving German participants in future commemorative events. His response was that since the generation concerned was now gone, and folk memory of the Germans during the Great War was comparatively sympathetic, he would in theory be amenable to 'making peace' with the Germans of 1914-18 .... but his own experiences as a boy under the WW2 Occupation, and the treatment of his father, and others he knew, as forced labourers in Germany, would make it difficult, in practice, for him to be reconciled over WW1 while grievances and painful memories from WW2 still rankled. This view, which I suspect will be widely held (and probably not only by older people), was perhaps already in his mind, as the Aubers Ridge anniversary, 9 May, falls immediately after VE Day, which he had commemorated only the day before.

Completely understandable.

As with my own father who served on a front line Lancaster squadron and lost many mates, but particularly because of the treatment of his school friend at the hands of civilians.

I did research for the Nachtjagd Gemeinschaft (if my memory serves me correctly of the title) and his attitude to my efforts was a tad off. His rather standoffish demeaner and arms length attitude said it all.

He only deemed to tell me why he was so anti-German shortly before he died. Having found out in 1956 that his missing friend had been treated so awfully. I suppose it is not so surprising.

[chrislock]

Quote: Now if Britain sinks into the sea the rest of Europe will heave a sigh of relief.

Jesus! I hope not. Can't imagine the huge sunami which would without doubt gobble up my house here in flat Flanders!! Errr hold on, my Belgian taxes are doing exactly that anyway!

[Guest exuser1]

On the reenactors front and the attitude to both this and war films I suggest a visit to the War and Peace show , one thing that I found difficult to understand is that many of the SS and Heer reenactors were from Germany were the wearing of such uniforms is banned , many of the dealers selling Nazi militaria were from Germany , so to say that the Germans can't understand our fascination with WW2 in all forms is because that's what they are programmed to say , mind you when I visit the militaria shows here in France 90% of the stuff for sale is WW2 German , and the Russians can't get enough of it either which is even more difficult to understand ?

[healdav]

On the reenactors front and the attitude to both this and war films I suggest a visit to the War and Peace show , one thing that I found difficult to understand is that many of the SS and Heer reenactors were from Germany were the wearing of such uniforms is banned , many of the dealers selling Nazi militaria were from Germany , so to say that the Germans can't understand our fascination with WW2 in all forms is because that's what they are programmed to say , mind you when I visit the militaria shows here in France 90% of the stuff for sale is WW2 German , and the Russians can't get enough of it either which is even more difficult to understand ?

I know, it's living among them that gives us this feeling that we know what motivates them.

[Paul Hederer]

"What I would really like to know from any German GWF pals or pals who are living there or who visit Germany, are there many Germans who are offended by the fact that the 100th anniversary is being marked?

Regards, Michael Bully"

Living here for six years now and having a German family, I would say the vast majority do not care, or are even aware. I'm sure as the anniversary approaches we'll see more shows discussing the war on television, but for the average German this is just a non-topic.

Paul

[Jack Sheldon]

Quite apart from anything else and I am quite serious about this, for almost the entire population May 1945 counts as Die Stunde Null [Zero Hour]. That is when history begins for them. That which went before really is another place.

Jack