Date: Thu, 18 May 1995 14:24:06 -0500 Reply-To: H-GERMAN EDITOR Dan Rogers Sender: H-NET List on German History From: H-GERMAN EDITOR Dan Rogers Subject: Re: Victimization Submitted by: Roland Wagner Well, it looks like we may have a modest amount of agreement in the current discussion of "victimization and demonization" of the common German people. A "geographic zones" theory of guilt seems to be operational here with some of you. This is of special interest to me, since my focus is on the Volksdeutsch in the former Soviet Union. Let me see if I have this correct. There is no disagreement that the ethnic Germans in Russia, Ukraine, and nearby areas should not be held accountable for the deeds of the Nazi regime (unless you subscribe to the racial theory that Germans have a "47th chromosome in the shape of a tiny swastika"). These Volksdeutsch became victims of a near genocidal pogrom by the Soviet state. As we move inward to the next geographic zone, to the Volksdeutsch who lived in Poland, the Sudetanland, and other areas outside the Reich, opinions become mixed. Some apparently feel that they bear a measure of guilt directly proportional to the "degree of enthusiasm" with which they supported the Nazi ideology. This was apparently enough of a crime to justify the mass murders, rapes, and pillaging that occurred to millions of these people as they were expelled from Eastern Europe. Also, it made it more convenient for a "cleaner" reunification of eastern and western Germany later in history since politicians wouldn't have to deal with the fuzzy border areas into which Germans had filtered since the Middle Ages. As we move into the former Reich itself, some believe that "anything goes." The crimes of the Nazi state were so heinous that anything done to the German citizens was appropriate, including the mass incineration of cities filled with civilian refugees. Apparently if the crimes of a state are heinous enough, the analytical distinction between the regime and the individual citizens, between macro and micro, blurs and disappears. We could argue (fruitlessly, I think) about the absurdity of holding a civilian population morally responsible for the actions of a totalitarian regime (would you, for example, have spoken out in those circumstances -- honestly? How many of you are willing to hold the Russian people accountible for the Gulag?). We could debate (endlessly) what having "enthusiasm" for the Nazi regime really meant (for example, did all those German civilians who were waving flags really know about and support the Holocaust?). And what exactly should the appropriate penalty be? (personal guilt? Perpetual condemnation as a pariah nation?). After half a century, debate on these issues still seems to generate more heat than light. It seems clear that we are still too close to these events for impartial and objective analysis. Perhaps in another generation the chasm will disappear and we will be able to view W.W. II with some of the clarity that has been attained for the events surrounding W.W. I. .