[Part 16]

[Benton Bradberry’s 2012 book, “The Myth of German Villainy” is a  superb, must-read, revisionist look at how the German people have been systematically, relentlessly and most importantly, unjustly vilified as the arch criminal of the 20th century. Bradberry sets out, cooly and calmly as befits a former US-Navy officer and pilot, to show why and how the German people have been falsely accused of massive crimes and that their chief  accuser and tormenter, organized jewry is in fact the real party guilty of monstrous crimes against Germans and the rest of the world.

In Part 16, the annexation of the German speaking area of Czechoslavakia, the Sudetenland, by Germany in 1938 is discussed. The British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain saw it a justified return of formerly German territory back to Austria/Germany despite the opposition from the British war mongers Winston Churchill, Anthony Eden, Duff Cooper, and Lord Halifax. 

Churchill was determined that Britain would eventually go to war with Germany and his fellow alarmists worked feverishly to bring it about.

“Was he deliberately channeling British power towards the service of the international Jews who were paying him through “The Focus,” or was he deluding himself that he was serving England?“

 — KATANA.]

NOTE: The author has very generously given me permission to reproduce the material here — KATANA.

 The book can be bought at Amazon here: The Myth of German Villainy

The Myth of

German Villainy

by

Benton L. Bradberry

Contents

[Clicking on a link in the Contents here will take you to that Part, in a separate post]

[Part 01]

Preface

Chapter 1 – The Myth of Germany as an Evil Nation

Germany’s Positive Image Changes Overnight

[Part 02]

Chapter 2 – Aftermath of the War in Germany

The Versailles Treaty

Effect of the Treaty on the German Economy

Was the War Guilt Clause Fair?

Did Germany Really Start the War?

[Part 03]

Chapter 3 – The Jewish Factor in the War

Jews at the Paris Peace Conference

Jews in Britain

[Part 04]

Chapter 4 – The Russian Revolution of 1917

Bolsheviks Take Control

Jews and the Russian Revolution

Origin of East European Jews

Reason for the Russian Pogroms Against the Jews

Jews Leave Russia for America

Financing the 1917 Revolution

Jews in the Government of Bolshevik Russia

[Part 05]

Chapter 5 – The Red Terror

Creation of the Gulag

Bolsheviks Kill the Czar

Jews as a Hostile Elite

The Ukrainian Famine (Holodomor)

[Part 06]

Chapter 6 – The Bolshevik Revolution Spreads Throughout Europe

Jews in the Hungarian Revolution

Miklos Horthy Saves Hungary

Jews in the German Revolution

The Spartacist Uprising in Berlin

Jewish Bolsheviks Attempt to Take Italy

Jewish Bolsheviks Attempt to Take Spain — The Spanish Civil War

Czechoslovakia in Danger of Communist Takeover

The Comintern’s Aim? World Domination!

[Part 07]

Chapter 7 – The Nation of Israel

History of the Expulsion of Jews

[Part 08]

Chapter 8 – Jews in Weimar Germany

Jews Undermine German Culture

[Part 09]

Chapter 9 – Hitler & National Socialists Rise to Power

The 25 Points of the National Socialist Party

[Part 10]

Chapter 10 – National Socialism vs. Communism

National Socialism

Jews Plan Marxist Utopia

[Part 11]

Chapter 11 – Jews Declare War on Nazi Germany

Text of Untermeyer’s Speech in New York

The Jewish Persecution Myth

Effect of Boycott on the German Economy

Jewish Exaggerations are Contradicted by Many

[Part 12]

Chapter 12 – The Nazis and the Zionists Actually Work Together for Jewish Emigration out of Germany

The Nuremberg Laws – 1935

The Zionist Movement

[Part 13]

Chapter 13 – Life in Germany Under Hitler

Night of the Long Knives

1934 Annual Nazi Rally at Nuremberg

Hitler Revives the German Economy

Hitler Becomes the Most Popular Leader in the World

[Part 14]

Chapter 14 – Hitler Begins Reclamation of German Territory

Chapter 15 – The 1936 Olympics

[Part 15]

Chapter 16 – “Anschluss”. The Unification of Austria and Germany

Austrian Economy Revived

Austria’s Jews

[Part 16]

Chapter 17 – Germany Annexes the Sudetenland

[Part 17]

Chapter 18 – War with Poland

The Polish Problem

Hitler’s Proposal to Poland

Kristallnacht

German-Polish Talks Continue

Jews Influence both Roosevelt and Churchill

British and American Political Leaders Under Jewish Influence

Roosevelt’s Contribution to Hostilities

Lord Halifax Beats the War Drums

Germany Occupies Bohemia and Moravia

Roosevelt Pushes for War

Anti-war Movement Becomes Active

Poles Murder German Nationals Within the Corridor

[Part 18]

Chapter 19 – The Phony War

Russo-Finnish War

The Norway/Denmark Campaign

German Invasion of Denmark and Norway

Churchill Takes Chamberlain’s Place as Prime Minister

[Part 19]

Chapter 20 – Germany invades France Through the Low Countries

The Phony War Ends.

Churchill the War Lover

The Fall of France

Hitler Makes Peace Offer to Britain

[Part 20]

Chapter 21 – The Allied Goal? Destruction of Germany!

[Part 21]

Chapter 22 – Germany as Victim

Rape and Slaughter

Jewish Vengeance

The Jewish Brigade

[Part 22]

Chapter 23 – Winners and Losers

Bibliography

Chapter 17

Germany Annexes the Sudetenland 

Czechoslovakia was a creature of the peace treaties following World War One; a new state cobbled together out of some of the remnants of the now defunct Austro-Hungarian Empire. The population of this new state was made up of 7,450,000 Czechs, 2,300,000 Slovaks, 720,000 Magyars (Hungarians), 560,000 Ruthenes, 300,000 Jews, 100,000 Poles …, and 3,200,000 Germans who comprised nearly a fourth of the country’s entire population.

Czechoslovakia was the antithesis of Woodrow Wilson’s concept of “self determination for all peoples,” which, ideally, would have manifested itself in ethnically homogeneous nation states. Combining all of these disparate nationalities into a single state had instability and conflict built into it from the outset. (One wonders why “multiculturalism” is such a popular idea today, since it has proven again and again to be unworkable.)

The light brown area surrounding Bohemia and Moravia was the German area of Czechoslovakia, known as the Sudetenland.  

A prosperous Sudeten German farm

The German population of Czechoslovakia was clustered mainly on its western border adjacent to Germany in a region known as the Sudetenland. These Sudeten Germans or Sudetendeutsche had lived in the region for centuries, and had become very prosperous under the Austro/Hungarian Empire. These industrious, meticulous Germans developed a well ordered society over time, with prosperous farms throughout the region and a highly productive mining and timbering industry. The Sudetenland also became highly industrialized during the nineteenth century and early twentieth century, with huge chemical works, and lignite mines, as well as numerous textile, china, and glass factories. The Sudetenland was the wealthiest and most productive part of the old Austro-Hungarian Empire, and the Sudeten Germans were by far the most successful and wealthy ethnic group. This remained true in the new state of Czechoslovakia. Within the Sudetenland, 39 percent of the population was employed in industry with only 31% in agriculture, compared to the rest of the country, where a majority were rural farmers. All the big factories were owned by Germans and controlled by German owned banks.

This region had been ruled for centuries by the German Hapsburgs, so the ruling nationality had always been German and the official language had always been German. Though the Czechs and the Germans had lived together for centuries in this region, formerly known as Bohemia, and Moravia, they had developed separate cultural, educational, political and economic institutions which kept them isolated from each other. The two groups did not mix well, and the region had seen constant strife between the Czechs and the Germans for a hundred years or more. The new artificial country of Czechoslovakia, created by the Treaty of St. Germain in 1919, was now ruled by the majority Czechs, which essentially reduced the 3.2 million Germans to being ruled by their former subjects. The Czechs took great satisfaction in lording it over their former German betters, and conditions for the Germans became very harsh very quickly. During 1919, some 600,000 Germans were uprooted and forced to leave their settlements of centuries, to make way for Czechs who were being moved in by the new government.

[Add. image] Austrians receive the Peace Terms at St Germain Chateau. Dr Carl Renner making his impassioned reply to the Allied Delegates after receiving the Peace Terms, 20 July 1919. Monsieur Clemenceau and President Wilson are sitting at the table in the background.

The Sudeten Germans never wanted to be separated from Austria and included in this newly created country in the first place. Now, their worst fears were becoming a reality as they became a suppressed minority in essentially a foreign country. Claiming the right of self-determination according to number ten of President Wilson’s Fourteen Points, they demanded that their homeland be re-combined with Austria, which was, of course, also ethnic German. The Czech army (now the Czechoslovakian army) was already moving in to occupy the Sudeten region with large numbers of Czech speaking troops. This region had been solidly ethnic German for centuries, and the sudden Czech occupation produced an explosive situation.

On March 4, 1919, almost the entire population of Sudeten Germans staged a peaceful demonstration against the Czech occupation and for self-determination. This demonstration was accompanied by a one day general strike. The Czech army quickly moved in and brutally dispersed the demonstration, killing 54 Germans and wounding 84 others. The Germans were shocked by the brutality of the Czechs, but they were law abiding, so they ended the strike and returned to work, but continued to harbor a seething, smoldering resentment against the Czechs which threatened at any time to explode into violence. These brutal killings of Germans by the Czechs only intensified nationalist and separatist sentiments among the Sudeten Germans. They wanted to separate themselves from Czechoslovakia and re-join Austria or to be annexed by Germany; or barring that, to obtain as much autonomy for themselves as possible. But the Treaty of St. Germain of September 10, 1919 specifically forbade union of the Sudetenland with either Austria or Germany and reconfirmed that it would remain a part of Czechoslovakia. If this decision defies common sense, it must be born in mind that the very purpose of these treaties was to break Germany apart, and to prevent the Germans from re-combining into a European super power. Therefore, the Sudeten Germans would not be allowed to join either Austria or Germany, but would be forced to remain subjects of Czechoslovakia against their will.

To make matters worse, a constitution for the new republic of Czechoslovakia was drawn up in 1920 without Sudeten German participation. The new constitution included provisions which were extremely prejudicial to Sudeten German interests, such as measures to redistribute German wealth to its various other ethnic groups. Land was confiscated from the wealthy German farmers and redistributed to other ethnic groups, mainly Czechs. The government also confiscated one fifth of all paper money to pay for other redistributive schemes, and since the Germans were by far the wealthiest, this fell hardest on them. Policies intended to protect the security of the Czechoslovak state and the rights of Czechs also worked to the disadvantage of Germans, which created local hostilities. Border forestland, considered the most ancient Sudeten German national territory, was expropriated for security reasons. The Czechoslovak government settled Czechs in areas of German concentration in an effort to moderate German nationalism, but the policy produced just the opposite effect. Czech schools were built in German districts for the same reason. Sudeten Germans, in possession of a large number of subsidized local theaters, were required to put these at the disposal of the Czech minority one night a week, which produced another cause for hostility. All efforts were made to dissolve the cohesive German society and to promote their assimilation into the other ethnic groups. All of these measures only further alienated the German population from the rest of the country and increased friction and strife between the Sudeten Germans and the Czechs.

When the Depression hit Europe in 1931, it hit the Sudeten Germans particularly hard, as they depended more than the rest of Czechoslovakia on international trade, especially with Germany. During the depression, the Czechoslovakian government took measures to protect its Czech citizens at the expense of the Sudeten Germans. As a result, the unemployment rate among the industrialized Sudeten Germans was five times that of the rest of Czechoslovakia. Tension between the two groups increased. Fighting broke out. The Czech army and Czech police sided with the Czechs and numerous atrocities were committed against the German population.

In 1931 the Sudeten German Peoples Party was created, led by Konrad Henlein, with the central objective of Sudetenland annexation with Germany. Henlein established communications with the Nazi Party in Germany and sought their support for annexation. After becoming Chancellor in 1933, Hitler openly called for annexation of the Sudetenland and eventually began providing financial support for the Sudeten German Peoples Party to help them towards that goal.

[Add. image] Konrad Henlein at his desk. Henlein was the leading Sudeten German politician in Czechoslovakia.

Though Henlein’s demand had almost unanimous Sudeten German support, it was vigorously opposed by the Czech government. If the Germans were allowed to secede from the Czech state, what about all the other nationalities? The very idea posed an existential threat to the state of Czechoslovakia. Moreover, the Sudetenland held some of Czechoslovakia’s richest resources, large deposits of coal in particular, and also its most productive industries. The Czech government was ready to fight, if it came to that, in order to prevent the loss of this wealthy region.

The Czechoslovakian army was one of the most powerful, well trained and best equipped in Europe at the time and could have withstood a German invasion attempt without outside assistance. The German army had not yet rebuilt itself. Nevertheless, President Benes entered into alliances with France and the Soviet Union as additional insurance, but the Germans saw this as an attempt at encirclement of their country. Even though the Soviet Union had entered the alliance, they asserted that they would not go to war against Germany unless France did also, and France was unprepared for war, so the alliances were essentially worthless.

In 1938 both the British and the French people were very opposed to war, though a belligerent faction among British leaders existed who did want war, including Winston Churchill, Anthony Eden, Duff Cooper, and Lord Halifax. This group called for war against Germany in the event of any attempt to annex the Sudetenland. Instead of viewing Hitler’s annexation of German peoples into the Reich as a limited goal of pan-Germanism, as was the case, they accused Hitler of wanting to create a super state in order to dominate the world, yet, there was no evidence that that is what Hitler wanted to do. Chamberlain, who was not a part of this group of British war mongers, happened to believe that the Sudeten Germans’ grievances were well founded and believed that Hitler’s intentions in the matter were limited. Both Britain and France, therefore, advised Czechoslovakia to give the Sudeten Germans the autonomy they sought, and then let them decide what they wanted to do. Czech President Benes, however, strongly resisted this proposal.

[Add. image] Czech President Edvard Benes with Czech troops in May 1938.

As the political situation worsened, security in the Sudetenland deteriorated. Armed clashes began to occur between bands of Sudeten Germans and the police and border forces. In a few instances, the Czech army was called out to pacify the situation. Leaders in Germany expressed their concern for their fellow Germans in the Sudetenland. Henlein and his Sudeten German Party then presented the Prague government with an eight point demand. Henlein demanded complete autonomy, ideologically as well as politically, and reparations for damages caused by the “injustices inflicted since 1918” on Sudeten Germans. Despite pressure from London and Paris to accept it, the Prague government rejected these demands out of hand. When fighting broke out in the Sudeten area and rumors of German troop movements across the border were passed around (which turned out to be untrue), the Czechoslovak army mobilized on May 20, 1918. Mobilization at that time was universally seen as a provocation, and war between Czechoslovakia and Germany seemed certain. A war between the two states was even egged on by Winston Churchill and his group.

Prime Minister Chamberlain stepped in and offered to mediate to try to settle the matter peacefully. He sent Vicount Runciman in to work things out between Germany and Czechoslovakia short of war. Runciman was unable to bring the two sides together in any kind of an agreement, however, so he returned to England. Upon his return to England, he presented the following report to the British government which was very sympathetic to the Sudeten Germans:

“Czech officials and Czech police, speaking little or no German, were appointed in large numbers to purely German districts; Czech agricultural colonists were encouraged to settle on land confiscated under the Land Reform in the middle of German populations; for the children of these Czech invaders Czech schools were built on a large scale; there is a very general belief that Czech firms were favoured as against German firms in the allocation of State contracts and that the State provided work and relief for Czechs more readily than for Germans. I believe these complaints to be in the main justified. Even as late as the time of my Mission, I could find no readiness on the part of the Czechoslovak Government to remedy them on anything like an adequate scale … the feeling among the Sudeten Germans until about three or four years ago was one of hopelessness. But the rise of Nazi Germany gave them new hope. I regard their turning for help towards their kinsmen and their eventual desire to join the Reich as a natural development in the circumstances.”

Czechoslovakian President Benes proposed a compromise plan, but it was too little, too late, and Henlein turned it down. He then instructed the Sudeten Germans to prepare for self defense in case of attack. On September 15, 1938 Henlein flew to Germany and met with Hitler. He then issued a proclamation demanding Sudetenland annexation with Germany. Riots and clashes with police broke out in the Sudetenland which were brutally put down by the Czech army. German newsreels showed evidence of widespread atrocities against Sudeten Germans. Hitler threatened to send in German troops to protect them.

Konrad Henlein, leader of the Sudeten German People’s Party, with Adolf Hitler in Germany.

Chamberlain went to Berchtesgaden on September 15 and met with Hitler. During the meeting, Hitler demanded the swift annexation of the Sudetenland by Germany or he threatened to invade in order to protect the Sudeten Germans, whom he claimed were being slaughtered by the Czechs. There was plenty of evidence from outside sources that what Hitler claimed was indeed occurring. Both the British and French governments accepted Hitler’s argument and supported his demand for annexation.

Predictably, however, the war mongering element among the British leadership opposed the settlement. Winston Churchill immediately issued a statement to the press denouncing Chamberlain’s policy:

“The partition of Czechoslovakia under pressure from England and France amounts to the complete surrender of the Western democracies to the Nazi threat of force. Such a collapse will bring peace or security neither to England nor to France. On the contrary, it will place these two nations in an ever weaker and more dangerous situation. The mere neutralization of Czechoslovakia means the liberation of 25 German divisions, which will threaten the Western front; in addition to which it will open up for the triumphant Nazis the road to the Black Sea.”

“It is not Czechoslovakia alone which is menaced, but also the freedom and the democracy of all nations. The belief that security can be obtained by throwing a small State to the wolves is a fatal delusion. The war potential of Germany will increase in a short time more rapidly than it will be possible for France and Great Britain to complete the measures necessary for their defense.”

But Hitler was not satisfied to simply annex the Sudetenland. He wanted to solve Czechoslovakia’s ethnic instability problem once and for all, and insisted that claims of Poland and Hungary for the return of their ethnic minorities from Czechoslovakia also be satisfied.

The Times of London editorialized that Hitler was right and supported the annexation of the Sudetenland by Germany. The editorial also supported the demands of Hungary and Poland.

Churchill, of course, took issue with this editorial of The Times. “In this single paragraph,” Churchill wrote:

“The Times gave support to the most extreme of Nazi demands, the complete cession of the Sudetenland, a demand which, if met, would have condemned Czechoslovakia to disintegration, and placed a majority of the Sudeten Germans under the grim rigors of Nazi rule.”

Churchill ignored the fact that the overwhelming majority of Sudeten Germans demanded annexation with Germany. That same day, the Foreign Office publicly disassociated itself from Churchill.

[Add. image] The Munich Agreement is signed on September 29, 1938. From left to right: Chamberlain, Daladier, Hitler, Mussolini, and Ciano pictured before signing the Munich Agreement, which gave the Sudetenland to Germany.

Chamberlain requested a conference with Hitler which would also include France and Italy to make a final decision on the matter. On September 29, 1938, Hitler met at Munich with the heads of government of France, Italy, and Britain. The Czechoslovakian government was not invited. From this meeting, the Munich Agreement was signed by all present, agreeing to all of Hitler’s demands. The Agreement stipulated that the Sudetenland be ceded to Germany, effective immediately. By this act, 3.25 million Sudeten Germans then became citizens of the Reich, along with approximately 38 percent of the territory of Bohemia and Moravia. Hungary received 11,882 square kilometers of Southern Slovakia and southern Ruthenia along with their Hungarian populations, and Poland received Tesin and two minor border areas in northern Slovakia along with their Polish populations. This was accomplished peacefully, without firing a shot. British historian A.J.P. Taylor wrote:

 

“The Munich Pact…was a triumph for all that was best and most enlightened in British life.”

 

Hitler greets Chamberlain at the Munich conference of September 29, 1938

Chamberlain flew back to London to a hero’s welcome. As he got off the plane, he held aloft an agreement signed by Adolf Hitler which stated the German leader’s desire never to go to war with Britain again.

Chamberlain proclaimed that he had secured “peace for our time.” As the jubilant crowd applauded and cheered, Chamberlain expressed his desire to find a peaceful solution to the Fuhrer’s wish to create an enlarged German homeland in Europe to include all Germans. He then read a further passage in the Agreement in which Hitler stated:

 

“We are determined to continue our efforts to remove possible sources of difference and thus to contribute to assure the peace of Europe.”

 

British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain proclaims “Peace for our time,” after the Munich Agreement permitting the German annexation of the Sudetenland.

Winston Churchill, quite expectedly, took the opposite view. He made a speech in the House of Commons in which he stated that the British Government, in approving the Munich Agreement, had “sustained a total and unmitigated defeat,” and that “a disaster of the first magnitude has befallen Great Britain and France.” Churchill had for some time called for a “Grand Alliance” between Britain, France, the United States, and the Soviet Union to “stop Hitler.”

[Add. image] Churchill with a Thompson submachine gun. Taken during his visit to the coastal defense positions near Hartlepool on 31 July, 1940.

But Churchill was a war monger of the first rank, and his statements about Germany were often inaccurate or gross exaggerations, and intended only to inflame public opinion against Germany. If the cause of World War Two could be pinned on a single person, it should be pinned on him; and if not on him alone, then on him and Roosevelt. He was also an opportunist. Churchill had been an ardent anti-Bolshevist from the start and blamed the Russian Revolution and all that came after it on the Jews. But then, when it suited his purposes, he jumped on the Zionist bandwagon, stating that Zionism ( which advocated the creation of a Jewish homeland in Palestine) would deflect European Jews away from social revolution to partnership with European imperialism in the Arab world.

In 1936, Churchill became associated with the informal London Jewish pressure group known as “The Focus,” (of which, more in the following chapter). The purpose of The Focus was to “open the eyes of the British public to the one great menace, Nazi Germany.” In reality, Germany was never a threat to Britain, and Hitler had done all he could to win Britain’s friendship. The Focus became Britain’s main contributor to the international Jewish propaganda campaign against Nazi Germany, and Churchill became its Gentile front man. Churchill was useful to The Focus in its campaign to destroy Hitler and the Nazis, and The Focus was useful to Churchill in bringing him back to power after years “in the wilderness,” as he put it. The Focus was lavishly funded by these wealthy British Jews and Churchill, as its front man, lived a lavish life as a result. (Churchill also received an excessively large payment from the Czechoslovakian government, which cast doubt on the genuineness of his opposition to the annexation of the Sudetenland by Germany.)

[Add. image] Winston Churchill speaking at a munitions factory in Ponders End, 1916.

In his role as Gentile front man for the Focus, Churchill began berating the British government for its “blindness to the Nazi threat,” and he especially went after Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain for his efforts to maintain the peace. In his articles and speeches, Churchill greatly exaggerated the extent of German rearmament and distorted the rearmament’s purpose by harping on German production of heavy bombers. In fact, Germany had never focused on heavy bombers, but Churchill used this lie to support his contention that Germany intended to eventually attack Britain. Hitler wanted only peace and friendship with Britain, not war, and said so repeatedly. Moreover, Hitler had made clear that his goal was to reconstitute the German state which had been dismembered by the Versailles Treaty. That plan was no secret to anyone, including Churchill. But Churchill and his fellow alarmists treated each of Hitler’s actions to fulfill that plan as a new and unexpected act of aggression, and further proof of his intent to conquer Europe. Churchill was determined that Britain would eventually go to war with Germany for his own reasons.

While others worked feverishly to avoid war, Churchill and his fellow alarmists worked feverishly to bring it about. Was he deliberately channeling British power towards the service of the international Jews who were paying him through “The Focus,” or was he deluding himself that he was serving England? That question will probably never be answered.

The British publicist, F.S. Oliver, said this about Winston Churchill’s character:

“From his youth up, Mr. Churchill has loved with all his heart, with all his mind, with all his soul, and with all his strength, three things: war, politics and himself. He has loved war for its dangers, he loves politics for the same reason, and himself he has always loved for the knowledge that his mind is dangerous — dangerous to his enemies, dangerous to his friends, dangerous to himself. I can think of no man I have ever met who would so quickly and so bitterly eat his heart out in Paradise.”

Germany Annexes the Sudetenland

German troops enthusiastically welcomed into Sudetenland, October 1, 1938

On October 1, 1938, the German army marched unopposed into the Sudetenland where they were received with jubilation. Czechoslovakia was an artificial and unworkable state created by intellectuals and supported by the victors of WWI. In reality, it had no chance of succeeding, and its demise was no tragedy. The remainder of the country, left over after the Munich Agreement, began immediately to fall apart along ethnic lines. On March 14, 1939, Slovakia declared its independence, followed soon after by Carpatho-Ukraine (Ruthenia). After these areas were gone, all that remained of the former Czechoslovakia were parts of Bohemia and Moravia. The situation was an open invitation for a Communist takeover.

The overwhelming threat to Western Christian Civilization at that time was Communist revolution instigated and supported by the Soviet Union. The Jewish Bolsheviks who controlled the Soviet Union had set up the Communist International (Comintern) for the specific purpose of taking control of all of Europe. They tried taking over Germany in the revolution of 1918 but were defeated by the Freikorps. They had even succeeded for a time in establishing the Soviet Socialist Republic of Bavaria, until also brought down by the Freikorps. They took Hungary briefly in 1919 but were thrown back by forces under Nicholas Horthy. They tried taking Italy in the 1920s but were defeated and driven out by Mussolini. They started a civil war in Spain in 1936 and nearly succeeded in creating a Soviet style Communist dictatorship in that country, but with the help of Mussolini and Hitler, the devout Catholic General Francisco Franco, after three years of bloody war, defeated the Communists and drove them out of Spain. Soviet Russia stood ready with a watchful eye to create and support Communist revolution in any European country that seemed vulnerable.

Czechoslovakia’s capital city, Prague, had a large Jewish population who had built an active Communist revolutionary party, ready at any time to act as the Soviet Union’s fifth column to take control of what remained of the former Czechoslovakia. Hitler made it known that he would not allow this to happen. The new president of Czechoslovakia, Emil Hacha, was himself concerned about this, and wanted to meet with Hitler. Hitler invited him to Berlin for talks. When he arrived at the train station with his daughter, he was met by Foreign Minister von Ribbentrop, who had a bouquet of flowers for the daughter. Hitler had also sent a box of chocolates. During the late night meeting, Hitler harangued Hacha relentlessly, until he finally signed an agreement making his country a protectorate of Germany.

[Add. Image] Emil Hacha meeting with Adolf Hitler.

When Hitler came out of the meeting, he was ecstatic. He told his two middle-aged secretaries; “Children, quickly, give me a kiss! Quickly!” The ladies kissed him on both cheeks. Hitler said:

“It is the greatest triumph of my life! I shall enter history as the greatest German of them all!”

Hitler had every reason to be satisfied with himself. So far, he had brought into Germany the Saar, Austria and the Sudetenland, and now he had made Bohemia and Moravia a protectorate. He had also essentially nullified the Versailles Treaty; and he had done it all through diplomacy, without firing a shot.

That same day, March 15, the German army moved in, meeting no resistance. On March 16, Hitler went to Prague and from the Hradcany Castle officially proclaimed that Bohemia and Moravia were now a German protectorate. Bohemia and Moravia were placed under the supervision of Reich Protector Baron Konstanin von Neurath and German officials manned government departments in a similar capacity as that of cabinet ministers. The Gestapo assumed police authority. Hitler was remarkably considerate of the existing Czech civil servants, allowing most of them to remain in their posts and permitting them to retire with pensions.

[Add. image] German army band playing outside Prague Castle after the German occupation of Czechoslovakia in March 1939.

Not to have occupied Bohemia and Moravia (the remnants of the former Czechoslovakia), would have invited disaster. Germany stood as the bulwark for all of Europe against the Communist menace. Only Germany held the Communists at bay and prevented them from sweeping over Europe. A Communist takeover of Bohemia and Moravia was out of the question.

Bohemia and Moravia contained 118,000 Jews at the beginning of the German occupation, most of whom resided in Prague. When the Germans moved in, Jews were dismissed from the civil service and placed in an extralegal position. The international Jewish press, of course, reacted with an intensified outpouring of vitriolic hyperbole against the Nazis. But what should Hitler have done? World Jewry was still engaged in a “holy war” against Germany. It would have been idiotic under the circumstances for Germany to retain large numbers of Jews in the Czechoslovakian government who would surely have cooperated with the Comintern to undermine and sabotage German control. Communism was banned and Czech communists, most of whom were Jews, fled the country. Large numbers of Jews who were not overtly affiliated with the Communist Party also left.

Hitler saves Czechoslovakia from the Communists by making it a protectorate of Germany. The sign on the marquee in the Czech city of Brno, reads “We thank our Fuhrer.” He gets an enthusiastic welcome.

As the victors of World War I, Britain and France assumed the role of enforcers of the Versailles Treaty, as well as all other treaties resulting from the war. The United States had withdrawn from Europe and took no such role. Germany had never willfully accepted the terms of the Versailles Treaty, and only signed it under duress. The Treaty had been imposed upon Germany by force, and Germany therefore acknowledged no moral obligation to abide by it. Moreover, the onerous terms of the treaty had been ruinous for Germany, and continued to have a deleterious effect on the lives of the Germany people by the time Hitler came to power. It would have been unreasonable to have expected that the burdensome terms of the Versailles Treaty would have continued in perpetuity, or to have expected Germany to continue to accept them without protest. Sooner or later, they would have had to come to an end, Hitler or no Hitler. Hitler avowed when he assumed the Chancellorship that he would abnegate the Treaty despite Britain’s and France’s determination to enforce it. He believed that the treaty was unfair and unjust and therefore had no moral force, and he was not alone in believing that. Numerous people of prestige and influence sided with Germany in the matter. George Bernard Shaw, for example, had this to say:

“It was evident that Germany needed only a resolute and clear-headed leader to denounce the [Versailles]Treaty; declare her determination to assert her full equality with the Powers, and refuse to be disarmed, plundered and chastised under the pretext of reparations and ‘war guilt’, to rally to him every living soul whose native language was German, and at the same time take a great step towards peace in Europe by proving that neither France nor England nor the United States dare outrage humanity by attempting military occupation of her territory on the model of the old partitions of Poland; in short, that instead of Europe being plunged into war she would be dragged back from the brink of it by Germany.”

Britain and France, against common sense, took the position that any violation of the terms of the Versailles Treaty would be a provocation for war. This irrational position was aggressively promoted by the “war party” in Britain, including Winston Churchill, Anthony Eden, Lord Halifax, Duff Cooper, Robert Vansittart, and a few others, but just as many believed there was just cause for Hitler’s actions. Hitler continued his defiance of the Treaty, gambling that neither Britain nor France had the stomach for another bloody war.

The intent of the Versailles Treaty was to reduce the size and power of Germany and to keep Germany down. Those clamoring for war with Germany on the basis of justice for Czechoslovakia were being disingenuous and were using the German occupation as a pretext for war.

At the same time that the German occupation of the Sudetenland created consternation among the anti-German elements (International Jewry in particular), Poland’s invasion of Cesky/Tesin in Bohemia aroused no concern whatever. These two territories of Czechoslovakia contained majority Polish populations, and Poland occupied them for the same reason Germany occupied the Sudetenland. Likewise, when, at the same time, Hungary occupied southern Slovakia, which contained a majority Hungarian population, it created hardly a stir. Yet, Germany’s actions were promoted as a cause for war.

Polish tanks invade Cesky/Tesin in Czechoslovakia in 1938. Though Germany was severely criticized for invading the Sudetenland, Poland was not, for doing the exact same thing.

[Add. image] German officers watch as Poland occupies the Czech town of Bohumin.

No one in either England or Germany wanted war except for Winston Churchill and his gang of war mongers and the Jewish war hawks who controlled him. When Prime Minister Chamberlain returned from a meeting with Hitler, he announced to the Parliament that “there will be no war.” While the people in both England and Germany were thanking God and celebrating that fortunate outcome, the scheming war mongers, including Churchill, got to work to undermine it. Inside of a week, the Jewish controlled press began smearing Chamberlain and tearing him down.

[END of Part 16]

______________________________

PDF Notes

* Total words = 6,259

* Total pages = 39

*Total images = 18

*Note: Images not in original book are indicated as “Add. image” (Additional image).

*Text in [square brackets] is not part of the original book.

*Special thanks to reader “mblaine” for providing the text for this book.

======================================

Click to download a PDF of this post (3.0 MB).

The Myth of Germany Villainy – Part 16

Click on a link to go to another part:

[Click images to enlarge]

Part 01 — Cover text; About the Author; Preface; Chapter 1: The Myth of Germany as an Evil Nation

Part 02 — Chapter 2: Aftermath of the War in Germany

Part 03 — Chapter 3: The Jewish Factor in the War

Part 04 — Chapter 4: The Russian Revolution of 1917

Part 05 — Chapter 5: The Red Terror

Part 06 — Chapter 6: The Bolshevik Revolution Spreads Throughout Europe

Part 07 — Chapter 7: The Nation of Israel

Part 08 — Chapter 8: Jews in Weimar Germany

Part 09 — Chapter 9: Hitler and National Socialists Rise to Power

Part 10 — Chapter 10: National Socialism vs Communism

Part 11 — Chapter 11: Jews Declare War on Nazi Germany

Part 12 — Chapter 12: The Nazis and the Zionists Actually Work Together for Jewish Emigration out of Germany

Part 13 — Chapter 13: Life in Germany Under Hitler

Part 14 — Chapter 14 & 15: Hitler Begins Reclamation of German Territory; The 1936 Olympics

Part 15 — Chapter 16: “Anschluss” The Unification of Austria and Germany

Part 16 – Chapter 17: Germany Annexes the Sudetenland

Part 17 – Chapter 18: War with Poland

Part 18 – Chapter 19: The Phony War

Part 19 – Chapter 20: Germany invades France – The Phony War Ends

Part 20 – Chapter 21: The Allied Goal? Destruction of Germany!

Part 21 – Chapter 22: Germany as Victim

Part 22 (last) – Chapter 23: Winners and Losers

See also:

The Myth of German Villainy: Author Ben Bradberry Interview — TRANSCRIPT

_____________________

Version History

Version 5: Mar 13, 2021 – Added new Go2 Cover images (3).

Version 4: Apr 27, 2020 — Re-uploaded images and PDF for katana17.com/wp/ version.

Version 3: Apr 9, 2020 — Updated links to other parts.

Version 2: Feb 14, 2017 — Added 8 more images. Added PDF of post for download.

Version 1: Feb 13, 2017 — Created post.

[Part 15]

[Benton Bradberry’s 2012 book, “The Myth of German Villainy” is a  superb, must-read, revisionist look at how the German people have been systematically, relentlessly and most importantly, unjustly vilified as the arch criminal of the 20th century. Bradberry sets out, coolly and calmly as befits a former US-Navy officer and pilot, to show why and how the German people have been falsely accused of massive crimes and that their chief  accuser and tormenter, organized jewry is in fact the real party guilty of monstrous crimes against Germans and the rest of the world.

In Part 15, the fulfillment of Hitler’s dream of uniting Austria with Germany; the subsequent revival of the Austria economy; and the situation with Austria’s jews pre and post “Anschluss” are described.

Austria was a creation of the Paris Peace Treaty and subsequent Versailles Treaty that forbade it from joining up with Germany to prevent Germany from becoming too powerful again. As it became more and more clear that Austria was not an economically viable state, popular support for union with Germany steadily increased and by the early 1930s popular support for union among both the German and Austrian populations was overwhelming.

Jews were mainly resident in the capital Vienna and dominated it through the Social Democratic Party in the early 1930s. By 1932 Englebert Dollfuss, the leader of the Christian Social Party, became the Austrian Chancellor and along with the Social Democratic Party opposed “Anschluss”. The Christian Social Party was now in a four way struggle with the Nazis, the Communists, and the Social Democrats and after a brief civil war the Nazi Party was banned and its leaders thrown in jail.

By 1938 Seyss-Inquart, the Nazi Minister of the Interior, became Chancellor, and the Nazi Party now controlled the government in Austria. When rioting broke out all over Austria over the issue of unification with Germany, Seyss-Inquart sent a request to Hitler to send in German troops to restore order. On the morning of March 12, the German 8th Army crossed into Austria. They faced no resistance whatever, but were greeted by crowds of cheering Austrians instead. The Anschluss was made immediately effective, subject to ratification by a plebiscite, which was passed with a 99% “yes” vote.

Prior to the Anschluss (union), Austria’s economy was in a catastrophic condition with nearly a third of Austrians out of work. The economy improved dramatically resulting in the Austrians seeing Hitler as a miracle worker.

Once Austria had been incorporated into the Reich, Germany’s laws automatically became Austria’s laws, including the Nuremberg Race Laws. The intent of the Nuremberg Laws, as well as the other anti-Jewish laws, was to break the Jewish grip on the economic, cultural, and social life of Germany and to encourage Jewish emigration. By 1940 Austria’s jewish population was down to 40,000 from 192,000

— KATANA.]

NOTE: The author has very generously given me permission to reproduce the material here — KATANA.

 The book can be bought at Amazon here: The Myth of German Villainy

The Myth of

German Villainy

by

Benton L. Bradberry

Contents

[Clicking on a link in the Contents here will take you to that Part, in a separate post]

[Part 01]

Preface

Chapter 1 – The Myth of Germany as an Evil Nation

Germany’s Positive Image Changes Overnight

[Part 02]

Chapter 2 – Aftermath of the War in Germany

The Versailles Treaty

Effect of the Treaty on the German Economy

Was the War Guilt Clause Fair?

Did Germany Really Start the War?

[Part 03]

Chapter 3 – The Jewish Factor in the War

Jews at the Paris Peace Conference

Jews in Britain

[Part 04]

Chapter 4 – The Russian Revolution of 1917

Bolsheviks Take Control

Jews and the Russian Revolution

Origin of East European Jews

Reason for the Russian Pogroms Against the Jews

Jews Leave Russia for America

Financing the 1917 Revolution

Jews in the Government of Bolshevik Russia

[Part 05]

Chapter 5 – The Red Terror

Creation of the Gulag

Bolsheviks Kill the Czar

Jews as a Hostile Elite

The Ukrainian Famine (Holodomor)

[Part 06]

Chapter 6 – The Bolshevik Revolution Spreads Throughout Europe

Jews in the Hungarian Revolution

Miklos Horthy Saves Hungary

Jews in the German Revolution

The Spartacist Uprising in Berlin

Jewish Bolsheviks Attempt to Take Italy

Jewish Bolsheviks Attempt to Take Spain — The Spanish Civil War

Czechoslovakia in Danger of Communist Takeover

The Comintern’s Aim? World Domination!

[Part 07]

Chapter 7 – The Nation of Israel

History of the Expulsion of Jews

[Part 08]

Chapter 8 – Jews in Weimar Germany

Jews Undermine German Culture

[Part 09]

Chapter 9 – Hitler & National Socialists Rise to Power

The 25 Points of the National Socialist Party

[Part 10]

Chapter 10 – National Socialism vs. Communism

National Socialism

Jews Plan Marxist Utopia

[Part 11]

Chapter 11 – Jews Declare War on Nazi Germany

Text of Untermeyer’s Speech in New York

The Jewish Persecution Myth

Effect of Boycott on the German Economy

Jewish Exaggerations are Contradicted by Many

[Part 12]

Chapter 12 – The Nazis and the Zionists Actually Work Together for Jewish Emigration out of Germany

The Nuremberg Laws – 1935

The Zionist Movement

[Part 13]

Chapter 13 – Life in Germany Under Hitler

Night of the Long Knives

1934 Annual Nazi Rally at Nuremberg

Hitler Revives the German Economy

Hitler Becomes the Most Popular Leader in the World

[Part 14]

Chapter 14 – Hitler Begins Reclamation of German Territory

Chapter 15 – The 1936 Olympics

[Part 15]

Chapter 16 – “Anschluss”. The Unification of Austria and Germany

Austrian Economy Revived

Austria’s Jews

[Part 16]

Chapter 17 – Germany Annexes the Sudetenland

[Part 17]

Chapter 18 – War with Poland

The Polish Problem

Hitler’s Proposal to Poland

Kristallnacht

German-Polish Talks Continue

Jews Influence both Roosevelt and Churchill

British and American Political Leaders Under Jewish Influence

Roosevelt’s Contribution to Hostilities

Lord Halifax Beats the War Drums

Germany Occupies Bohemia and Moravia

Roosevelt Pushes for War

Anti-war Movement Becomes Active

Poles Murder German Nationals Within the Corridor

[Part 18]

Chapter 19 – The Phony War

Russo-Finnish War

The Norway/Denmark Campaign

German Invasion of Denmark and Norway

Churchill Takes Chamberlain’s Place as Prime Minister

[Part 19]

Chapter 20 – Germany invades France Through the Low Countries

The Phony War Ends.

Churchill the War Lover

The Fall of France

Hitler Makes Peace Offer to Britain

[Part 20]

Chapter 21 – The Allied Goal? Destruction of Germany!

[Part 21]

Chapter 22 – Germany as Victim

Rape and Slaughter

Jewish Vengeance

The Jewish Brigade

[Part 22]

Chapter 23 – Winners and Losers

Bibliography

Chapter 16

“Anschluss” The Unification

of Austria and Germany 

Beginning with his 25 Points speech of 1919, one of Hitler’s overriding goals was the unification of all German people into a single nation-state. Hitler was an Austrian, but always called himself a German, and he considered Austria to be part of Germany. The giant multi-ethnic Austro-Hungarian Empire had been dismembered after World War I by the Paris Peace Conference and Austria was left as a small rump state of 6.8 million people, mostly ethnic Germans. As part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, Austria had been an integral part of a relatively self-sufficient economic system, but now, having been carved out of that giant empire and made into a tiny independent state, Austria was no longer an economically viable entity. She had been cut off from sources of raw materials which had been available to her from the Austro-Hungarian Empire, and also from markets for export. Austria was a German speaking, German state, and it would have been only logical for Austria to combine with Germany after the Austro-Hungarian Empire no longer existed. Moreover, there was strong support for that in both Austria and Germany, but the Versailles Treaty specifically forbade it. World War I had been fought primarily to reduce the size and power of Germany, and the Versailles Treaty was designed to prevent Germany from ever becoming a super power again. For that reason, the victors of the war were steadfastly opposed to the union of Austria with Germany.

As it became more and more clear that Austria was not an economically viable state, popular support for union with Germany steadily increased. By the early 1930s popular support for union among both the German and Austrian populations was overwhelming. It was estimated that at least 80 percent of the Austrian people favored unification with Germany, and nearly as high a percentage of Germans also favored it. As a preliminary measure, an attempt was made in 1931 to create a customs union between Austria and Germany to permit free trade and unrestricted travel between the two countries, but the agreement was blocked by outside forces, notably France and Czechoslovakia, who saw it as an attempt to circumvent the Versailles Treaty. With a 25% unemployment rate and a starving population, Austria was desperate to find a means of increasing trade and productivity, but all such attempts were blocked by these outside forces. Union with Germany would have solved all of Austria’s problems, and it would also have partially fulfilled the aspirations of the National Socialists for a single German state.

Austria was politically divided during this period by a struggle between left wing and right wing groups. Traditional, mostly rural Austrians, along with the bourgeoisie, supported the conservative, Catholic Christian Social Party (CS), while the workers and labor unions, mainly in the cities, supported the Social Democratic Party. The Communist Party (KPO) and the National Socialist Party (Nazi) were marginal groups at first. The Communist Party was composed mostly of Jews, but it was small and failed to gain traction in Austria as it had in Germany. Most of Austria’s Jews belonged to the Social Democratic Party, and most of these Jews were avowed Marxists. The leader of the party, Otto Bauer, was a Jew, and Jews filled all of the leadership positions in the party, though the rank and file were mostly Austrian laborers and members of Jewish led labor unions.

[Add. image — Otto Bauer (5 September 1881 – 4 July 1938), the jewish leader of the Social Democratic Party. Bauer died of heart failure in Paris on 4 July 1938, aged 56, just four months after Austria had become part of the Nazi Third Reich.

His sister, Ida Bauer, was a patient of Sigmund Freud, who published a famous case study about her using the pseudonym Dora.]

During the early 1930s, 192,000 Jews were resident in Austria, almost all of them in Vienna. Jews represented 2.8 percent of the Austrian population, but nearly 10 percent of the population of Vienna. The population of Vienna was just under 2 million. Despite their small numbers, Jews totally dominated the capital city. Jews owned two thirds of all newspapers and banks. They owned 60 percent of all large businesses and industries. Over 50% of lawyers, doctors and dentists in Vienna were Jewish, and nearly a third of university professors were Jewish.

Through their control of the Social Democratic Party, Vienna’s largest party, Marxist Jews dominated the city government of Vienna, giving it the reputation of “Red Vienna.” They held a majority of seats on the City Council, and they controlled the labor unions. The Jewish controlled Social Democratic Party was traditionally anti-clerical and given to anti-religious rhetoric, which the Catholic clergy used to label them “godless, Jewish-Bolshevists.”

[Add. image — Englebert Dollfuss, Chancellor of Austria here in Geneva in 1933. Having served as Minister for Forests and Agriculture, he ascended to Federal Chancellor in 1932 in the midst of a crisis for the conservative government. In early 1933, he shut down parliament, banned the Austrian Nazi party and assumed dictatorial powers.]

The conservative Christian Social Party (CS), which had the support of the Catholic Church in Austria, managed to gain control of the Austrian government in 1932 through a coalition with other conservative parties. It’s leader, Englebert Dollfuss, became the Austrian Chancellor. While the Jewish dominated Social Democratic Party (SDP) controlled the government of Vienna, the Christian Social Party (CS) controlled the national government.

By this time, a branch of Germany’s Nazi party had established itself in Austria. The members wore the same uniforms as their German colleagues and adhered to the same doctrines of anti-Marxism and anti-Semitism. They were recruited mainly from the lower bourgeoisie and the peasantry and their main political goal was the union of Austria and Germany. The movement grew slowly and no Nazi had as yet managed to get elected to the national parliament. In the provincial elections of 1932, however, the Nazis won a number of seats in several of the local diets.

After Hitler became Chancellor in Germany in 1933, the Austrian Nazis, led by Dr. Alfred Frauenfeld, began immediately to concentrate their energies to bring about Anschluss, or union with Germany. The Austrian Nazis considered themselves a part of the Nazi movement in Germany, and took their orders from Hitler.

Though Dollfuss had previously favored Anschluss, he changed his mind and decided that the best path for Austria was independence. Dollfuss was a devout Catholic and he wanted to build up an alternative to Nazism — a Catholic, anti-socialist, authoritarian, Austrian movement. He was supported in his opposition to Anschluss by the Social Democratic party under Jewish, Marxist control, but he wanted nothing to do with them either. He was as much opposed to the Reds as to the Nazis.

The Christian Social Party was now in a four way struggle with the Nazis, the Communists, and the Social Democrats. In order to assert control, the Dollfuss regime dissolved parliament, banned the Austrian Nazi and Communist parties, and centralized power in the office of the Chancellor who now had dictatorial powers to rule the country. Many of the Nazi leaders were thrown in jail. A brief civil war ensued in which the Dollfuss government was victorious. A concordat was soon announced with the Holy See (the Pope), which essentially made Catholicism the official religion of Austria.

Dollfuss didn’t last long, however. He was soon assassinated by the Nazis in a failed coup attempt as the political struggle in Austria continued. Kurt Schuschnigg, who succeeded Dollfuss as Chancellor, made up his mind to destroy the Austrian Nazis and immediately began to initiate actions against them, including rounding them up and locking them up in internment camps. The oppressive Schuschnigg regime was not popular with the Austrian people, the majority of whom actually favored the Nazis because the Nazis supported union with Germany. The Christian Social Party (CS) under Schuschnigg, which now controlled the national government, and the Social Democratic Party (mostly Jewish) which now controlled the government of Vienna, became strange bedfellows as they united in their opposition to union with Germany, though in little else.

The Austrian people, on the other hand, were 80 percent in favor of unification with Germany.

On February 12, 1938, Hitler summoned Schuschnigg to his villa at Berchtesgaden in Bavaria to discuss Schuschnigg’s problems with the Austrian Nazis. During the meeting, Hitler was very condescending toward the Austrian Chancellor, and virtually instructed him to lift the ban on political parties in Austria, to reinstate full party freedoms, to release all imprisoned members of the Nazi Party and to permit them to participate in the government. When Schuschnigg indicated reluctance to comply with these instructions, Hitler threatened military action. Schuschnigg had no choice but to comply, as Austria’s military power was no match for that of Germany. Moreover, Austrian public opinion was against the Austrian Chancellor.

After returning to Austria, Schuschnigg, in compliance with Hitler’s instructions, appointed Arthur Seyss-Inquart, a lawyer and member of the Nazi Party, as Interior Minister. He also removed General Alfred Jansa as Chief of Staff of the Austrian Army, also at Hitler’s instruction, because Jansa had expressed his intention to resist any attempted German entry into Austria by armed force. Hitler wanted to avoid any such confrontation at all costs.

But safely away from Hitler’s intimidating presence, Schuschnigg began reverting back to his recalcitrant position on union with Germany and continued to oppose it. He also continued his oppressive measures against the Austrian Nazi Party which advocated union with Germany. The mostly Jewish Social Democrats agreed on very little with the Christian Socialists, but they turned out in force to support Schuschnigg in opposition to union with Germany. Groups of these Social Democrats (mostly Jews) went all around the city of Vienna painting slogans on the sidewalks and on the walls of buildings in support of Austrian independence and against Austrian union with Germany. Austria’s Jews vehemently opposed Hitler and the Nazis, including Austrian Nazis, and they wanted nothing to do with Hitler’s Germany, certainly not union with it. This put them in direct opposition to the Austrian people and served only to inflame the already rampant anti-Semitism in Austria.

In contravention of Hitler’s instructions Schuschnigg immediately announced a plebiscite (a national vote) to be held on Austria’s Independence day of March 13, 1938, to determine whether or not Austria would unite with Germany. He then set out on a tour of Austria to try to whip up patriotic feelings and to persuade the Austrian people to vote for an independent Austria, and against union with Germany.

Schuschnigg’s plebiscite was to be open to all Austrian voters, but was to be restricted only to those over the age of 24. It was Austria’s youth — those under 24 years of age — who were most overwhelmingly in favor of union with Germany. Various other devices were also to be employed to stack the vote against union with Germany. One device he used to influence the vote was to write the wording of the plebiscite in a confusing way so that the voters would be voting for independence while believing they were voting for unification.

Arthur Seyss-Inquart, (L) with Hitler, replaces Kurt Schuschnigg (R) as chancellor of Austria.

Hitler was furious with Schuschnigg and declared that he would not permit the plebiscite to go forward under those circumstances. Hitler described Austria as:

“A country which for many years had no elections at all, where there were no means of determining who were qualified to vote, and then announces an election which is to take place in less than three and a half day’s time. There are no lists of voters,” Hitler said, “there are no voting cards, there are no means of testing a person’s right to vote, there is no obligation to maintain the secrecy of the ballot, there is no guarantee that the election will be conducted with impartiality, there is no security that the votes will be properly counted – and so on.”

Hitler sent an ultimatum to Schuschnigg on March 11, demanding that he step down as Chancellor and hand over all power to the Austrian National Socialists (Nazis), or face invasion. Unable to gain support from either Italy, France or Britain, and with little support from the Austrian people, Schuschnigg resigned as Chancellor. Seyss-Inquart, the Nazi Minister of the Interior, then became Chancellor, and the Nazi Party now controlled the government in Austria.

Rioting had broken out all over Austria over the issue of unification with Germany, so the new Chancellor, Seyss-Inquart, sent a request to Hitler to send in German troops to restore order. Whether they were actually needed or not is not clear, but this was the necessary pretext for German troops to enter Austria. The next day, on the morning of March 12, the German 8th Army crossed into Austria. They faced no resistance whatever, but were greeted by crowds of cheering Austrians instead.

Hitler entered Austria by car in the afternoon of the same day. His first stop was at Braunau, his birthplace. In the evening he entered Linz where he grew up. At both stops, he received an overwhelming reception.

Hermann Goering, who had accompanied Hitler into Austria, made a telephone call that evening back to party officials in Germany, and stated:

“There is unbelievable jubilation in Austria. We ourselves did not think that sympathies would be so intense.”

Hitler then made a triumphal tour through Austria which ended in Vienna. A huge crowd totalling more than 200,000 filled the Heldenplatz (Heroes Square) in Vienna to hear him proclaim that Austrian was now a part of Germany.

“This is the moment of the greatest accomplishment of my life,” he said. “The German Reich, as it stands today, can never be broken by anyone again.”

The Anschluss was made immediately effective, subject to ratification by a plebiscite. Following proper registration of Austria’s voting population, elections were held in both Germany and Austria on April 10, 1938. The Anschluss was approved by the Austrian people with a 99.75% “yes” vote, and by the German people with a 99.2 % “yes” vote.

[Add. image — Austrian “Anschluss” (union) with Germany, March 12, 1938. The Sudetenland territory was re-united with Germany at the end of  September, 1938.]

Hitler wrote in Mein Kampf, “People of the same blood should be in the same Reich.”

Austrians cheer as German troops enter.

Hitler is warmly greeted as he enters Austria. 

Hitler enters Vienna. 

Austrians are overjoyed by arrival of German troops.

Cardinal Theodor Innitzer, a political figure in the Austrian Christian Social Party (CS) declared on March 12:

“The Viennese Catholics should thank the Lord for the bloodless way this great political change has occurred, and they should pray for a great future for Austria. Needless to say, everyone should obey the orders of the new institutions.”

Robert Kauer, President of the Protestants in Austria, greeted Hitler on March 13, as;

“saviour of the 350,000 German Protestants in Austria and liberator from a five-year hardship.”

Karl Renner, Austria’s first post-war chancellor in 1918, announced his support for the Anschluss and appealed to all Austrians to vote in favor of it on April 10.

“Hitler had a plausible case to argue when he claimed that the Anschluss was only the application of the Wilsonian principle of self-determination.” —  Alan Bullock. Historian.

“The crisis of March, 1938 (which led to the Anschluss) was provoked by Schuschnigg, the Austrian Chancellor, not by Hitler.” —  A.J.P.Taylor. British historian.

“He (Chamberlain) had no difficulty in recognizing where this injustice lay. There were six million Germans in Austria to whom national reunification was still forbidden by the Peace Treaties of 1919. Three million Germans in Czechoslovakia whose wishes had never been consulted; three hundred and fifty thousand people in Danzig who were notoriously German.” —  A.J.P.Taylor. British Historian.

“The German Army was invading Austria, or rather was marching in to the general enthusiasm of the people.” – A.J.P.Taylor, British historian.

“The pull of sentiment, language and history, reinforced by the material advantages offered by becoming part of a big nation, was strong enough to waken a genuine welcome when the frontier barriers went down and the German troops marched in garlanded with flowers…. there was a widespread sense of relief, even amongst those who were far from being Nazis.” —  Alan Bullock. Historian.

As might have been expected, Jewish writers took a different view. The Jewish historian William L. Shirer, in his book The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, calls the Anschluss “the rape of Austria.”

[Add. image —  jewish journalist William L. Shirer (1904 – 1993) with his 1960 book, The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich ]

Hitler later commented:

“Certain foreign newspapers have said that we fell on Austria with brutal methods. I can only say: even in death they cannot stop lying. I have in the course of my political struggle won much love from my people, but when I crossed the former frontier (into Austria) there met me such a stream of love as I have never experienced. Not as tyrants have we come, but as liberators.”

Austrian Economy Revived

Prior to the Anschluss, Austria’s economy was in a catastrophic condition with nearly a third of Austrians out of work. Just across the border in Germany, unemployment had been eliminated, living standards and working conditions had vastly improved, and economic, social and cultural life was flourishing again. Before Hitler became Chancellor, economic conditions in Germany had been the same as Austria’s.

Following Austria’s incorporation into the Reich, conditions also improved dramatically in Austria. Within six months after Anschluss, the total number of unemployed was reduced from 401,000 to only 99,865. By 1940, the unemployment rate in Austria was only 1.2 percent.

By the end of 1938, during which the Anschluss occurred, the weekly income of industrial workers in Austria rose 9 percent. The Austrian GNP experienced a 12.8 percent growth rate in 1938, and 13.3 percent in 1939. Seldom in history has a country experienced such rapid, dramatic economic growth.

Shortly after the Anschluss, Germany’s National Labor Law and its comprehensive social security system were introduced in Austria. Basic rights in the workplace were thereby guaranteed, and workers were protected from arbitrary dismissal. By these measures, relief was also quickly provided to more than 200,000 desperately poor people, and health care benefits were extended to the working class. A large-scale construction program was immediately launched to provide affordable housing. Cultural life was greatly encouraged, with energetic promotion of music, the fine arts and literature. The result of all of this was an increase in prosperity and optimism, but also a jump in the Austrian birthrate. The Austrian people believed that union with Germany was the best thing that ever happened to Austria, and they believed that Hitler was a miracle worker.

According to Professor Evan Burr Bukey of the University of Arkansas, in his book, “Hitler’s Austria,”:

“Hitler enjoyed a frenzied acclimation among the Austrian people seldom seen since the days of the Caesars.”

Austria’s Jews

In 1938, prior to the Anschluss, 192,000 Jews lived in Austria, almost all of them in Vienna, a city of nearly 2 million. In spite of their relatively small numbers, Austria’s Jews wielded vast and disproportionate wealth and power. For this reason, and all the other reasons that Jews have been universally despised by their host populations, Austrian Jews were extremely unpopular with the Austrian people.

Professor Evan Bukey wrote:

“The predominant position of the Jews in an impoverished country only intensified the fear and loathing of the Austrian masses. As we have already seen, Jewish businesses and financial institutions managed much of the country’s economic life. At the time of the Anschluss three-quarters of Vienna’s newspapers, banks and textile firms were in Jewish hands … The extraordinary success of the Jews in the learned professions also inspired jealously and spite. Over 50 percent of Austria’s attorneys, physicians and dentists were Jewish.”

Yet, Jews were only 2.8 percent of the Austrian population. Moreover Jews isolated themselves within a closed society in Austria, with intense in-group cooperation and mutual assistance between themselves, at the total exclusion, and expense, of non-Jewish Austrians. Many of them dressed differently. They were regarded by Austrians as an alien, parasitic elite who exploited non-Jewish Austrians for the benefit of Jews alone.

They also avoided physical work and treated ordinary Austrians with condescension.

According to Professor Bukey, large numbers of Austrians, especially of the Catholic faithful, viewed baptized Jews, as well as all other Jews, with a hatred;

“so tightly woven into the fabric of Austrian society that it constituted a Sorelian political myth, immune to empirical falsification.” (Georges Sorel, a French philosopher averred that “myth” was a powerful motivator in people’s lives.)

Jews on the streets of Vienna prior to Anschluss.

This seething, barely contained hatred of the Jews boiled over on March 11, 1938, as crowds gathered to welcome Hitler into Vienna where he was to announce the Anschluss. Professor Bukey writes that:

“Untold thousands of Viennese took to the streets of their city like mad persons, dragging anyone who “looked Jewish” from vehicles, clubbing and beating victims, desecrating synagogues, robbing department stores, and raiding Jewish apartments. They compelled rabbis to scrub toilet bowls with prayer shawls and stole whatever cash, jewelry, and furs they could find. An SS correspondent would later write admiringly, ‘The Viennese have managed to do overnight what we have failed to achieve in the slow-moving, ponderous north up to this day. In Austria, a boycott of the Jews does not need organizing the people themselves have initiated it.’”

Once Austria had been incorporated into the Reich, Germany’s laws automatically became Austria’s laws, including the Nuremberg Race Laws. The intent of the Nuremberg Laws, as well as the other anti-Jewish laws, was to break the Jewish grip on the economic, cultural, and social life of Germany and to encourage Jewish emigration. After Anschluss, when these laws applied in Austria, the Austrian Jews became disenfranchised overnight. What had taken 5 years to accomplish in this regard in Germany was done within days in Austria.

By March 18 the authorities had closed down the offices of the Jewish community and Zionist organizations in Vienna and sent their officers to Dachau. During the first weeks after the Anschluss, Jews were fired from their jobs in theaters, community centers, public libraries, and universities. Throughout Austria, Jews were arrested and imprisoned.

Local Nazis rounded up Jews in the city of Vienna and forced them to scrub the streets and walls with brushes. The photo below was widely publicized at the time as an example of the cruelty and pointless humiliation Jews in Vienna were subjected to, but there was also a rational explanation for what took place which is not usually reported. Prior to the Anschluss, when Chancellor Schuschnigg was campaigning against Austrian unification with Germany, the Social Democrats in Vienna turned out in large numbers to support him. Most of Vienna’s Jews belonged to the Social Democratic Party, and as Jews, they were fervently against union with Germany. International Jewry, after all, was engaged in a “holy war” against Germany, which included an economic boycott campaign, and an anti-German propaganda campaign in the international Jewish press. This “holy war” had the enthusiastic support and participation of Austria’s Jews. The last thing Austrian Jews wanted was unification with Germany.

In support of Schuschnigg’s campaign, Jewish Social Democrats painted anti-unification slogans on the sidewalks and walls of buildings throughout the city of Vienna. This angered the non-Jewish Austrians, the vast majority of whom supported unification with Germany. It was the Jews who painted the slogans all over the walls and sidewalks, so it was the Jews who were made to scrub them off. That fact was left out of the international anti-German propaganda. The sidewalk cleaning project may well have been humiliating, but it was not without justification; at least an explanation. But it is also true that the Austrian people took unseemly pleasure in the humiliation of these wealthy and formerly powerful Jews as they were being forced to clean up the sidewalks. Crowds gathered, hissed, and spat abuse at them as they scrubbed.

Jews are forced to clean painted slogans off the sidewalks of Vienna. The slogans had been previously painted on the sidewalks by Jews opposing Anschluss.

At the same time, Jewish stores were plundered by SA men who sometimes (cynically but with a pretense of legality) left a receipt. Jewish businesses were Aryanized, that is, Jewish owners were forced to sell their businesses to Austrians, or Aryans, in transactions that were decidedly one sided and invariably a big financial loss to the Jew. The greed in Vienna ran out of control as Austrians stepped on one another to get at Jewish wealth. The American journalist William Shirer, who was Jewish, witnessed all of this and described it as “an orgy of sadism.”

[Add. image — William L. Shirer (February 23, 1904 – December 28, 1993), left, the bureau chief for CBS radio, at the broadcasting center in Berlin in 1939.]

Jews began leaving Austria in massive numbers. In August 1938 the “Reich Central Office for Jewish Emigration” was set up in the Rothschild palace in Vienna, for the purpose of cutting through the red tape and facilitating rapid Jewish emigration out of Austria. SS Captain Adolf Eichmann was assigned there as one of the administrators. By June 1939 the office had aided in the emigration of 110,000 Austrian Jews. An assembly line process was established through which the Jews passed in one day’s time, relinquishing one document (and piece of property) at every step of the way until the end when he and his family received visas out of the country. Eichmann employed the services of the local Jewish leadership to process this emigration — much of it to Palestine.

[Add. image — The Palais Albert Rothschild was a palatial house in Vienna, one of five Palais Rothschild in the city owned by members of the Rothschild banking family of Austria, a branch of the international Rothschild family. In 1954 the palace was torn down.]

In late June, 1939, the remaining Jews, as well as all non-Jews married to Jews, still working in the private sector, were fired from their jobs and “encouraged” to leave the country. By this time, hundreds of Jewish owned factories and thousands of businesses had been closed or confiscated by the government.

The population of Jews in Germany in 1933 was approximately 500,000, and in Austria, 192,000. By 1940 only 160,000 remained in Germany and 40,000 remained in Austria, for a total of 200,000 in Germany and Austria combined. All the rest had emigrated.

Anschluss could now be checked off of Hitler’s checklist of things he had avowed to accomplish.

[END of Part 15]

______________________________

PDF Notes

* Total words = 6,188

* Total pages = 34

*Total images = 16

*Note: Images not in original book are indicated as “Add. image” (Additional image).

*Text in [square brackets] is not part of the original book.

*Special thanks to reader “mblaine” for providing the text for this book.

======================================

<

div>

Click to download a PDF of this post (4.2 MB).

The Myth of Germany Villainy – Part 15 – “Anschluss” The Unification of Austria and Germany

Click on a link to go to another part:

[Click images to enlarge]

Part 01 — Cover text; About the Author; Preface; Chapter 1: The Myth of Germany as an Evil Nation

Part 02 — Chapter 2: Aftermath of the War in Germany

Part 03 — Chapter 3: The Jewish Factor in the War

Part 04 — Chapter 4: The Russian Revolution of 1917

Part 05 — Chapter 5: The Red Terror

Part 06 — Chapter 6: The Bolshevik Revolution Spreads Throughout Europe

Part 07 — Chapter 7: The Nation of Israel

Part 08 — Chapter 8: Jews in Weimar Germany

Part 09 — Chapter 9: Hitler and National Socialists Rise to Power

Part 10 — Chapter 10: National Socialism vs Communism

Part 11 — Chapter 11: Jews Declare War on Nazi Germany

Part 12 — Chapter 12: The Nazis and the Zionists Actually Work Together for Jewish Emigration out of Germany

Part 13 — Chapter 13: Life in Germany Under Hitler

Part 14 — Chapter 14 & 15: Hitler Begins Reclamation of German Territory; The 1936 Olympics

Part 15 — Chapter 16: “Anschluss” The Unification of Austria and Germany

Part 16 – Chapter 17: Germany Annexes the Sudetenland

Part 17 – Chapter 18: War with Poland

Part 18 – Chapter 19: The Phony War

Part 19 – Chapter 20: Germany invades France – The Phony War Ends

Part 20 – Chapter 21: The Allied Goal? Destruction of Germany!

Part 21 – Chapter 22: Germany as Victim

Part 22 (last) – Chapter 23: Winners and Losers

See also:

The Myth of German Villainy: Author Ben Bradberry Interview — TRANSCRIPT

_____________________

Version History

Version 5: Mar 13, 2021 – Added new Go2 Cover images (3).

Version 4: May 5, 2020 — Re-uploaded images and PDF for katana17.com/wp/ version.

Version 3: Apr 9, 2020 — Updated links to other parts.

Version 2: Jan 6, 2017 — Added one image. Added PDF of post for download.

Version 1: Jan 5, 2017 — Created post.

[Part 6]

“I am deeply stirred by the word which Ulrich Hutten wrote the last time he seized his pen: — Germany.”

ADOLF HITLER

January 30th, 1937

The Case for Germany 

A Study of Modern Germany 

by

A. P. Laurie

M. A. Cantab., D. Sc., LL. D. Edin., F. C. S., F. R. S. E.

With a Preface by Admiral Sir Barry Domvile

K. B. E., C. B., C. M. G.

Berlin W 15

Internationaler Verlag

1939

FIRST EDITION ………… JUNE 1939

SECOND EDITION ……. JULY 1939

ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

PRINTED IN GERMANY

DEDICATION

It is with admiration and gratitude for the great work he has done for the German people that I dedicate this book to the Fuhrer.

A. P. L.

TO THE READER

There are two sides to every question. You have read one side in our Press for six years.

This book gives the other side.

A. P. L.

PREFACE

It is a great pleasure to me to introduce the public to Dr. Laurie’s valuable book on modern Germany. He is best known to the world as a brilliant scientist, but he has found time in the intervals of his work to pursue with ardour the task upon which every sensible member of the British and German races should be engaged — namely the establishment of good relations and a better understanding between these two great nations.

Dr Laurie knows full well that this friendship is the keystone to peace in Europe — nay, in the whole world.

He is one of the small group who founded the Association known as “The Link”, whose sole aim is to get Britons and Germans to know and understand one another better. He is one of the most zealous workers in this good cause in the country.

He writes of the National Socialist movement with knowledge and great sympathy.

The particular value of this book lies in the fact that it is written by a foreigner, who cannot be accused of patriotic excess in his interpretation of the great work done by Herr Hitler and his associates. I recommend this volume with confidence to all people who are genuinely impressed with the desire to understand one of the greatest — and most bloodless — revolutions in history.

BARRY DOMVILE

Robin’s Tree

8th May 1939.

“As we advance in our social knowledge, we shall endeavour to make our governments paternal as well as judicial; that is, to establish such laws and authorities as may at once direct us in our occupations, protect us against our follies, and visit us in our distresses; a government which shall repress dishonesty, as now it punishes theft; which shall show how the discipline of the masses may be brought to aid the toils of peace, as the discipline of the masses has hitherto knit the sinews of battle; a government which shall have its soldiers of the ploughshare as well as its soldiers of the sword, and which shall distribute more proudly its golden crosses of industry — golden as the glow of the harvest — than it now grants its bronze crosses of honour — bronzed with the crimson of blood.”

RUSKIN. Political Economy of Art.

“All front fighters fought side by side and went through an inferno. They are all comparable to the heroes of the ancient world. It was the manhood of the nations in their prime who fought and experienced the horrors of modern war.

In another war the flower of the nations’ men and women will have to fight. Europe will be destroyed if the best in all of the nations are wiped out. A new conflict will exceed even the ghastly tragedies of the Great War.

I believe that those who rattle the sabres have not participated in war. I know that war veterans speak and think differently.

They energetically desire to prevent another conflict. I hope that the men who are standing before me can contribute to preserve the peace of the world — a peace of honour and equality for all.

Let us not talk of prestige as between the victors and the defeated. This is my one request: Forget what has divided the nations before and remember that history has advanced.”

Field Marshal GOERING addressing the British

and German war veterans.

CONTENTS

CHAPTER ……………………………………………………………. PAGE

Dedication

To the Reader

Preface

Field Marshall Goering’s Address

I.   DER FUHRER ……………………………………………………….. 11

II.   THE BELEAGUERED CITY ……………………………………. 21

III.   NATIONAL SOCIALISM ……………………………………… 25

IV.   THE NAZI RALLYS AT NUREMBERG ……………………. 34

V.   THE FOREIGN POLICY OF GERMANY ……………………. 41

VI.   ENGLAND AND GERMANY ………………………………….. 49

VII.   MARCH 7th, A MOST IMPORTANT DATE …………… 54

VIII.   THE REAL ENEMY OF EUROPE ……………………….. 58

IX.   COMMUNISM VERSUS NATIONAL SOCIALISM …… 62

X.   THE UNION OF THE GERMAN PEOPLE …………………. 68

XI.   ACTS OF “AGGRESSION” BY GERMANY ……………… 79

XII.   THE DANCE OF DEATH ……………………………………… 85

XIII.   OUR FUTURE POLICY TOWARDS GERMANY ……. 93

XIV.   THE HITLER YOUTH MOVEMENT ……………………… 100

XV.   THE WINTER HELP ORGANIZATION ………………….. 104

XVI.   NATIONAL SOCIALISM AND THE PROTESTANT

CHURCH ……………………………………………………………………… 109

XVII. ECONOMICS …………………………………………………….. 118

XVIII. THE FOUR YEARS PLAN …………………………………… 138

XIX.   THE GERMAN COLONIES …………………………………. 141

XX.   THE LABOUR FRONT ………………………………………….. 146

XXI.   AGRICULTURE …………………………………………………. 155

XXII. MUNICH AND AFTER ………………………………………… 167

Chapter Twelve

THE DANCE OF DEATH

We have recently developed a habit of holding public meetings to denounce the sins of our neighbours. On such occasions violent and exaggerated statements are made and the whole audience worked up to a condition of glorious indignation and intense moral satisfaction with themselves thanking God as the Pharisee in the Temple, that they are not as this Publican. I cannot find in the scriptures that Our Lord tells us to meet together to confess the sins of our brothers, instead of confessing our own sins, and we are especially warned not to pass judgment. We, like the village gossip, always assume the worst. What effect are such meetings likely to have in the countries which are denounced? We have recently had some experience owing to the German press having at last taken to hitting back, digging out some black passages in our past history, and describing them with the gross exaggeration customary in political propaganda. These attacks in the German press have produced a feeling of intense indignation here. We may criticise our own sins, but are not going to have any damned foreigner doing it for us. It is none of his business, we say. Curiously enough the Germans have just the same feeling about things we say about them, and so the piling up of ill feeling is growing on both sides every day.

It is generally admitted by serious students to-day that the war of 1914 had no legitimate cause, if any cause for war can be regarded as legitimate. There have been in the past economic wars, dynastic wars, religious wars and wars for the conquest of territory, but in 1914 the nations of Europe had no quarrel with each other, and the whole world was prospering and increasing in trade.

[Page 86]

It is true that we were very jealous of the rapid increase of the German export trade, and suspicious of the Fleet they were building although it was much less than half the size of our own, but I doubt if any merchant feeling the pinch of German competition in the world market would have regarded that competition as a justifiable reason for war.

The quarrel between Austria and Serbia could have been settled by reasonable negotiation between Austria and Russia without disturbing the rest of Europe. The only outcome of the war has been that millions of lives were thrown away, and a distracted Europe and an impoverished world left as the only tangible result.

Looking back on those years before the war, I realise that an insidious propaganda against Germany had been carried on for a long time, — why or by whom or with what intent I do not know, — which was gradually poisoning our minds. It is true Germany had the most powerful land army in the world, that the German Emperor had the gift of saying boastful and irritating things, and that there was a pan-German society which amused itself by drawing imaginary maps of a German European Empire. There had also been some trouble over the Agadir incident, when the German Emperor woke up to find that we had presented France with the whole of Morocco which did not belong to us; but there was no justification for saying that Germany meditated wars of conquest, and as an actual fact the German foreign office was in dread of the power of Russia.

What were the facts? Since the war of 1870, for which France and Germany were equally to blame, up to 1914 Germany had been at peace with all the world. We on the other hand had been constantly at war. We had invaded and conquered Egypt, we had made war on the Boers, we had fought in Africa and on the frontiers of India, and had annexed Burma. The gates of the temple of Janus had never been closed; yet we were firmly convinced that we were a peaceful non-aggressive people, and Germany an aggressive military nation.

[Page 87]

Now that no serious student of the events leading up to 1914 that the German government was to blame any more than any other European government including our own, this legend about an aggressive Germany is obviously false; yet it is still believed by many people in this country, and we are told that Hitler is the successor of the Kaiser, and aims at the military conquest of Europe. The last war was psychological, it had no basis on realities, and if there is another war in Europe it will also be psychological.

In the old days of mercenary armies in Europe, two kings might quarrel and let loose their armies on each other without troubling to consult the people, whose first knowledge that war had been declared was when soldiers of both sides began looting their farms. To-day, now that we have conscript armies, it is necessary for the government before it can declare war to rouse the peoples of two countries to such a hatred of each other, that decent Englishmen and decent Germans get out their rifles and try to kill each other. This is done by means of propaganda.

There are of course powerful interests in every country to whom war means big profits and who may be secretly engaged in financing. propaganda and, as I have shown elsewhere, the Socialists and Communists in Europe to-day are exerting every effort to set the four western powers at war; but this is not sufficient to explain the rapid spread of an infection over a country producing all the symptoms of mental rabies. The Press have no scruples about stimulating this mental intoxication if it sells a few more copies of the paper, and do not hesitate about publishing shocking lies, and using the poster to. excite the public.

The most serious danger to Peace is the utter want of any feeling of responsibility on the part of the British, French and American Press and wireless. Let me take a recent example.

The annexation of Bohemia and Moravia, by the German government, and the joining of Memel to the Reich, has caused considerable excitement in this country. It is therefore a time when those responsible for news should do their best to calm and not excite public imagination. The B.B.C. sent out a message that the German government had told the Lithuanian government that if they did not hand over Memel, German planes would bomb the capital of Lithuania, and that while the Lithuanian parliament was meeting, German bombing planes flew backwards and forwards overhead.

[Page 88]

There are poisons known to medicine which are called cumulative poisons. One drop will do no harm, but it remains in the body waiting for the next drop and the next and the next, until sufficient of the poison has accumulated to produce illness and death. The same is true of poisons to the mind. We read in the Press a lie about Germany, next day we read part of a speech denouncing Germany, on the Sunday we hear a sermon in which Germany is attacked. We pick up a magazine lying on the club table and there is an article abusing Germany. And so day by day and week by week and month by month this cumulative poison collects in our minds until the day comes when it produces a mental fever in which all sense of proportion is lost and we are controlled by the horrible delusion that it is our duty to go out and kill.

An interesting example of this occurred in the House of Commons the other day. The leader of the Labour party and the leader of the Liberal party, both accused Franco of having dropped from his planes chocolate boxes containing infernal machines to blow children to pieces. There is a well known morbid disease known as persecution mania which often results in the sufferer committing murder. Both these men have reached this dangerous mental condition. They will not have to commit the murder themselves, but will send other men out to kill and to be killed.

When once war has been declared, the governments of both sides take charge of the propaganda machine and pour out lies about the people on the other side in order to keep hatred at a killing point. Many will remember that during the first year of the war, it was decided by both sides on the French front to have a truce at Christmas with the result that the German and English soldiers got so friendly that if the higher command had not stopped it at once, they would have refused to go on killing each other. I remember the first time I visited France during the war. I went to the camouflage factory and was astounded to find that our officers liked the Germans and only began to use bad language when the Portuguese were mentioned. The hatred of the German which was felt in Great Britain did not extend to the fighting line. As I watched Chinese labourers, French peasant girls, German prisoners and English soldiers all working happily together I wondered what we were fighting about.

[Page 89]

It is also necessary, in order to keep the war fever at its height, to invent a slogan. Our slogan was that we were fighting to save democracy, — the victory of the allies having resulted in the abolition of parliament and the setting up of dictators in nearly every country in Europe.

I have during my life seen the nations of Europe hurled at each other’s throats in a meaningless slaughter by means of lying propaganda, and when I see the same thing going on to-day in an aggravated form, I confess I am very much afraid. The German people who have been carrying through a revolution against enormous odds, have doubtless done many things of which we cannot approve, but these things have not only been exaggerated out of all proportion, but have been successfully used to rouse the most dangerous and bloodthirsty of all human emotions, — moral indignation, and the church has been pressed into service in order to bring us nearer to war. Everywhere the gospel of hate is being preached in the Press and from the pulpit. We are told by those preaching this gospel that they have no hostility to the German people but only to the German government, the wicked Hitler and the dreadful Nazis. If that is true, surely the right way to go about it is to persuade the German people that our view and not their view is right. Surely a hatred of Hitler is not a reason for killing millions of Germans, and incidentally killing millions of Englishmen in the process. If war is declared against Germany, every German whatever his private opinions will line up behind Hitler to defend his fatherland, and after a furious and bloody war, nothing will have been settled and Europe ruined.

We are told that Hitler is going to do this and is going to do that; let us at any rate wait and see if he does do any of these things before we dream of plunging into war.

[Page 90]

The danger of the situation in this country is that good well-meaning people have got trapped by this propaganda and are beginning to think that the killing of Germans is a righteous and Christian act. If these people would go to Germany and visit some of the little German towns and wander about among the decent kindly people and say to themselves when they see a German workman returning to his home, “I am going to kill that man”, and a German mother sitting in a public garden with her children, “I am going to make her a widow, and I am going to drop bombs upon this town and set it blazing in flames with the tortured people dying in agony in the ruins”, all this in the name of the Christian religion, I believe they would go away shuddering at committing such devilry in the name of Christ.

When savage tribes wish to make war upon another tribe, they work their young men up to the killing point by means of war dances which produce the necessary mental intoxication. Our method to-day is more elaborate, but the object and the outcome is the same. The dance of death is getting wilder and wilder in this country, until nothing will satisfy us except a holocaust of blood.

It is obvious that the war propaganda in this country and in America, cannot be kept going without a large expenditure, and the investment of capital in buying up politicians, managing governments, and controlling the British and American Press. It is impossible to find out who really owns the big British dailies behind the scenes, but it is evident that most of them dare not publish anything but anti-German news. Probably the only really free press in England today, are the local weekly newspapers.

Those who handle large sums of money are the International financiers, who do not spend money for ideological reasons, but only to make more money. It was not till I read the story of the political activities of the great Jewish banking firm Kuhn Loeb and Co, and the way in which they controlled American Presidents, and financed the Japanese war against Russia, that I realised the connection between war and high finance, which is the polite name for money lending on a big scale.

[Page 91]

We cannot imagine our dear old orthodox British banks indulging in such unorthodox practices, but they pick up the crumbs which fall from the masters table. The profits are made in handling big loans, the general public finally holding the baby. Since the war, by means of propaganda, the American public have been persuaded to invest large sums in loans to bankrupt South American States, every penny of which has been lost, the financiers making their profit and clearing out.

We had a ramp in the cotton industry, organised by the “City”, which robbed the Lancashire workers of their savings and ruined the industry.

The richest field for plunder for the international financier, is war and rumours of war. Owing to the present bad temper among European nations, some five thousand millions, if we include the U.S.A., is being spent on armaments, with no control on profits here or in America, and most of the money is being borrowed, while war means the borrowing of huge sums by the government at high rates of interest. It is obvious then, that while war ruins nations, it is the best way in which high finance can make enormous profits, the burden of interest being born by future tax payers.

In the second place, as long as Germany and Italy are under their present governments, they will not touch foreign loans, and Germany by her method of internal economy and trading has eliminated the international financier, and those who make profits by playing with foreign exchanges. That is doubtless why the government is being forced by the “City” to start a trade war with Germany. If the economic methods devised by Germany are successful, and spread to other nations, and if Hitler succeeds in his policy of establishing permanent peace in Europe, the high financier will cease to be able to exist. It is therefore their main interest today to plunge the four powers into war, in order to destroy Germany and Italy. Having failed in September to start Europe fighting over a time table, they are now trying to bring in the U.S.A., which has already begun a trade war against Germany. It would be interesting to know the real origin of Roosevelt’s outburst about defending “Christianity, democracy and international good faith”. Who pulled the strings and sat grinning in his bank parlour in New York?

[Page 92]

The organisation of mass propaganda here and in the U.S.A., by financial groups, means the end of democracy, which is based on the free expression of opinion and putting both sides before the people. Not only is the Press and the B.B.C. controlled, but the House of Commons itself is being intimidated, as the Members of Parliament fear their constituents whose minds have been poisoned by mass propaganda. There are many Members of Parliament opposed to our hostility to Germany, but they are afraid to speak in the House.

In fact, we have reached the extraordinary position in this “free and democratic” country, that the only place where a fearless discussion is possible and takes place, is in the House of Lords, where the members separated by their exalted position from the tyranny of machine-made democratic opinion, can speak freely what they believe, and excellent speeches are made opposing our hostility to Germany.

Freedom of speech, a high level of intelligence, and a genuine desire for the public good, apart from the low motives of political life, has deserted the House of Commons, and taken refuge in the House of Lords.

Once their propaganda has been successful, the governments of democratic countries have to yield as our Government has yielded to the outcry about the annexation of Bohemia and Moravia. Only Hitler and Mussolini are strong enough to say No and will keep the peace unless we and France compel them to draw the sword. Unfortunately in this country the “City” pulls the strings, and while our young men will be fighting and dying under the delusion that they were defending Christianity and democracy, they would really be fighting to rake profits for the international financiers.

The vultures of finance gorge on war and rumours of war, and millions of lives are sacrificed to fill their money chests.

[Page 93]

Chapter Thirteen

OUR FUTURE POLICY

TOWARDS GERMANY

The Peace Pact having been signed with Germany, and the German people in Central Europe having accomplished their union under one Reich, with the exception of one minor area, Danzig, the question before the people of this country is what is to be our policy towards Germany in the future.

We must agree that it has not been a wise policy in the past. While on the one hand admitting that the conditions forced on them by the Treaty of Versailles were unfair and would have to be revised, on the other hand instead of arranging with them that the revisal be done by agreement, we have protested against every step they took in this direction. Why could we not have done what we did in the case of Turkey in agreeing to the fortification of the Dardanelles? — a matter much more vital to us than anything happening in Central Europe. Either we could have adopted the policy of the Opposition, said No, and been prepared to back our No with war if necessary, or we could have agreed to the revisal by mutual consent.

Mr. Chamberlain in arranging for a conference of the four Powers to settle the Sudeten German problem, has adopted the policy which we should have adopted from the beginning. The Sudeten German question differed from anything that had happened before, as up to that time Germany had been engaged in internal re-organization and in completing, by the union — with Austria, the policy begun by Bismarck, — a policy which was entirely their own affair. The problem of Sudeten Germany was the first to involve the interests of another state, and was further complicated by the alliance between CzechoSlovakia and France. Germany was therefore quite right in accepting the offer to settle the matter by agreement according to the promise made by Hitler in his speech of March 7th 1936.

[Page 94]

Mr. Chamberlain having initiated this new policy of consultation among the four Powers on any point of disagreement, it is all the more necessary to define our attitude towards Germany.

In order to be able to do this, we must begin by considering what are the vital necessities of the German people, and whether there is any reason why we should oppose them. In considering this question we must put on one side our democratic sentiments, and our disapproval of some of the things the German Government have done within their own country, and look into the question on a purely business basis from the point of view of our Imperial interests.

To deal first with the needs of the German people. There are 80 million Germans living on a small area in Europe with a comparatively poor soil, who cannot like the French obtain all the food they want from the fertile soil of their own country. It is therefore evident that they must either be satisfied with a very low standard of comfort and an underfed population, or develop external trade, or undertake military conquest of new territory.

In spite of the alarm of the Opposition, we may dismiss the idea that Germany is meditating ventures of military conquest. Such a policy must result in ruin and disaster, and though partly successful would not improve her economic position. Even if Hitler is the military filibuster which the Opposition foolishly imagine him to be, we may take it for granted that the average German citizen would rather trade than fight. The days of military conquest and subjugation of other nations in Europe are over, as there is no genuine economic advantage to be obtained from it. This is clearly perceived by the German people and in course of time will doubtless be understood by our own politicians who in this matter are mentally behind the times.

[Page 95]

The only alternative therefore is extended trade, and Germany is making every effort she can to carry out this policy. While trading with any and every nation, she has looked round the world to see whether there is any region open to her which is economically undeveloped and which would supply her with the raw materials she requires. Putting on one side for a time her claim for colonies, and realising the importance of doing nothing to arouse the jealousy and suspicion of Great Britain, she has agreed to a strict limitation of her fleet, and is looking for a development of trade on land areas.

If we look at the map of Europe, we shall recognise that the. obvious direction for her trade expansion is in the countries situated on the Danube and beyond that the Balkans and Turkey, along the lines of the old overland trade route from Asia to Europe. She has already developed a considerable trade with the states on the Danube and with the Balkan states, and is projecting a great canal taking ships up to 1500 tons to connect the Rhine with the Danube.

There can be no question that there are great possibilities of development in these economically backward countries, and that Germany will be of the greatest assistance to them, enabling them to take advantage of modern scientific methods of production.

Although she has been compelled by her economic position to enter into special trade agreements, she is not attempting to claim any monopoly and if she is successful in developing these countries economically, we shall reap some of the benefits. Surely with our world trade and vast Empire, we can allow Germany to cultivate this garden lying at her door. Doubtless these countries will be included in the German “sphere of influence”, whatever that may mean. I cannot see that this is any business of ours, as no vital interests of the British Empire can be affected by the development of trade in the central parts of Europe. It is the right of every nation to adopt the form of government they prefer, and we have no more right to try and compel nations to adopt our political theories by acts of war than the Roman Catholic Church has the right to crush Protestantism by promoting war in Europe. We are a business people engaged in world trade and, avoiding all ideologies, we must look at the whole question from a purely business point of view. To repeat the famous phrase of Bismarck with a difference. — The whole of the Balkans is not worth the life of one British soldier. Surely possessing the world and the fatness thereof, we need not grudge her this line of development.

[Page 96]

There are rumours that the Soviet is breaking up and that the next great national movement is going to be in the Ukraine which formed an independent republic after the war and was afterwards massacred into submission by the Soviet. The Ukrainians in Poland who have been badly treated by the Poles are demanding Home Rule, and the Ukrainians in CzechoSlovakia are evidently in a restless condition. The Ukraine includes the black soil wheat area of Russia on the Dneiper, and could supply unlimited wheat to Germany in return for manufactured goods and will naturally enter into close relations with Germany who will be her natural protectors against the Soviet. Therefore if once an independent Ukraine republic was established and entered into friendly relations with Germany, we should be glad that the essential needs of Germany for raw materials had been satisfied. To quote Hitler:

 “A nation which is satisfied and well fed is more likely to keep the peace than a nation which is dissatisfied and hungry.”

Ah, our Opposition will reply, but Germany will be exercising throughout all these regions that vague and mysterious thing called a sphere of influence. As long as they are exercising a sphere of influence results in these nations being contented and well supplied with goods, and therefore secures the peace of Europe, why should we object, and oppose these natural developments which are inevitable because they are based upon the facts of geography. The answer is there is no alternative plan except to make war on the German people and reduce them to such desperate impoverishment and slaughter of so many of their youth, that they are again brought to their condition after the thirty years war and will require a century to recover. Mr. Lloyd George says we can crush them like an eggshell. He would find the eggshell made of tempered steel.

I have searched the pages of Hansard containing the speeches of the Opposition in the recent debate on a vote of censure against the Government’s foreign policy, with a view to finding out what is their alternative policy to the one advocated by Mr. Chamberlain. This alternative policy was given by Mr. Dalton and is worthy of quotation in full.

[Page 97]

“There is once more a possibility, it may not last much longer. There is still one more chance for British diplomacy to bring together into an effective combination all those nations in the East of Europe who are threatened by this German push to the East. They are still there a potential combination, the Soviet Union, Poland, Rumania, Yugo-Slavia, Turkey and Greece. They are all members of the League of Nations, to which we and France still belong. You have still there a potential formidable force if it could be welded together for peace and for organised resistance to further endeavours to dislocate Europe.”

It is unfortunate that men in the responsible position of leaders of the Labour party should be so ignorant of the real situation in Europe to-day. Germany far from dislocating Europe is consolidating Europe by helping to adjust the injustices caused by the peace treaties, and has no intention of threatening any of these countries with aggression. France who has signed a peace pact with Germany and is anxious to develop her trade relations with her, would not support the Labour policy, and the Soviet is too busy with internal affairs and with Japan, to indulge in the venture of a European war at the call of our Labour party. When Mr. Dalton’s delegate called on the governments of Poland, Rumania, Yugo-Slavia, Turkey and Greece, they would receive his proposals with astonishment, and tell him that they were much too busy making profitable trade agreements with Germany.

Mr. Dalton had great hopes of the new Prime Minister of Hungary. If he had listened over the wireless the other day he would have heard the Prime Minister saying that the closest bonds of friendship united Hungary to Germany and Italy, because they would be for ever grateful to them for enabling them to recover their stolen territories from Czecho-Slovakia.

Our policy in Europe in the past has been called securing “the balance of power” which meant that if ever we thought one nation in Europe was getting more powerful than the other nations we made it our business to promote war against that nation, and to support war when it came with our money bags, our fleet and expeditionary forces.

[Page 98]

This policy is openly advocated by Mr. Ramsay Muir who glories in the days of Marlborough and Wellington, and wishes to see them come back again. There can be no question that this policy of the past has cost Europe millions of lives on a hundred battle-fields. We not only promoted wars but when war had once begun supported its continuance with our money bags until the war to quote Mr. Lloyd George was “fought to a finish”, with the result that it ended probably in an unjust treaty which opened the door to future wars.

Can anyone doubt now that if we had adopted Lord Lansdowne’s policy in 1917, and made peace with Germany then, we should have saved all the dangers and difficulties of the last twenty years.

To my mind the policy of the Balance of Power is a damnable policy. We have been in the past the evil genius of Europe. It is surely evident that if the policy of the Opposition was adopted, and could be successfully carried out, blocking Germany’s natural trade expansion in the Danube basin and in the Balkans, the German people confined to a limited area with no hope of commercial development, would be compelled to fight in order to live. The choice therefore is between Mr. Chamberlain’s policy of allowing Germany a free area for commercial expansion, or war — a war in which Germany would be fighting for her life.

The maddest of all nightmares from which the Opposition suffer, is that Germany would attempt a military conquest of the Ukraine. Either she would have to march six hundred miles across Polish territory, to which Poland would naturally object, or if she marched through Czecho-Slovakia would find herself lost in the Carpathian mountains, with no railways or roads, and would still have to violate either Rumanian or Polish territory. The one thing that would save the Soviet, if it is true that it is breaking up, would be an external attack.

The difficulty that Germany and Italy find in dealing with democracies, is that they have no continuity of foreign policy, and therefore States with a stable form of government and a continuity of foreign policy have to be very cautious in their approach to France and Great Britain. France, where the members of the Cabinet are paid their salaries weekly, and Great Britain, where the old policy of continuity of foreign Policy has been abandoned for the pursuit of opposite policies by the Government and the Opposition.

[Page 99]

Since the peace pact with Germany was signed, there has been an outburst of attack on Germany, which started before the new decrees against the Jews, in the Press, by politicians, and from the pulpit, and Germany is naturally anxiously watching to see whether the next election will return the parties of the Left to power, who would denounce the treaty with Italy, and seek for some pretext to declare war on her.

In every capital in Europe, the triumph of the parties of the Left in this country at the next election, would be taken as the red signal for war.

[Page 100]

======================================

PDF of this post. Click to download (0.3 MB). >> The Case for Germany – Part 6

[Part 5]

“I am deeply stirred by the word which Ulrich Hutten wrote the last time he seized his pen: — Germany.”

ADOLF HITLER

January 30th, 1937

The Case for Germany 

A Study of Modern Germany 

by

A. P. Laurie

M. A. Cantab., D. Sc., LL. D. Edin., F. C. S., F. R. S. E.

With a Preface by Admiral Sir Barry Domvile

K. B. E., C. B., C. M. G.

Berlin W 15

Internationaler Verlag

1939

FIRST EDITION ………… JUNE 1939

SECOND EDITION ……. JULY 1939

ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

PRINTED IN GERMANY

DEDICATION

It is with admiration and gratitude for the great work he has done for the German people that I dedicate this book to the Fuhrer.

A. P. L.

TO THE READER

There are two sides to every question. You have read one side in our Press for six years.

This book gives the other side.

A. P. L.

PREFACE

It is a great pleasure to me to introduce the public to Dr. Laurie’s valuable book on modern Germany. He is best known to the world as a brilliant scientist, but he has found time in the intervals of his work to pursue with ardour the task upon which every sensible member of the British and German races should be engaged — namely the establishment of good relations and a better understanding between these two great nations.

Dr Laurie knows full well that this friendship is the keystone to peace in Europe — nay, in the whole world.

He is one of the small group who founded the Association known as “The Link”, whose sole aim is to get Britons and Germans to know and understand one another better. He is one of the most zealous workers in this good cause in the country.

He writes of the National Socialist movement with knowledge and great sympathy.

The particular value of this book lies in the fact that it is written by a foreigner, who cannot be accused of patriotic excess in his interpretation of the great work done by Herr Hitler and his associates. I recommend this volume with confidence to all people who are genuinely impressed with the desire to understand one of the greatest — and most bloodless — revolutions in history.

BARRY DOMVILE

Robin’s Tree

8th May 1939.

“As we advance in our social knowledge, we shall endeavour to make our governments paternal as well as judicial; that is, to establish such laws and authorities as may at once direct us in our occupations, protect us against our follies, and visit us in our distresses; a government which shall repress dishonesty, as now it punishes theft; which shall show how the discipline of the masses may be brought to aid the toils of peace, as the discipline of the masses has hitherto knit the sinews of battle; a government which shall have its soldiers of the ploughshare as well as its soldiers of the sword, and which shall distribute more proudly its golden crosses of industry — golden as the glow of the harvest — than it now grants its bronze crosses of honour — bronzed with the crimson of blood.”

RUSKIN. Political Economy of Art.

“All front fighters fought side by side and went through an inferno. They are all comparable to the heroes of the ancient world. It was the manhood of the nations in their prime who fought and experienced the horrors of modern war.

In another war the flower of the nations’ men and women will have to fight. Europe will be destroyed if the best in all of the nations are wiped out. A new conflict will exceed even the ghastly tragedies of the Great War.

I believe that those who rattle the sabres have not participated in war. I know that war veterans speak and think differently.

They energetically desire to prevent another conflict. I hope that the men who are standing before me can contribute to preserve the peace of the world — a peace of honour and equality for all.

Let us not talk of prestige as between the victors and the defeated. This is my one request: Forget what has divided the nations before and remember that history has advanced.”

Field Marshal GOERING addressing the British

and German war veterans.

CONTENTS

CHAPTER ……………………………………………………………. PAGE

Dedication

To the Reader

Preface

Field Marshall Goering’s Address

I.   DER FUHRER ……………………………………………………….. 11

II.   THE BELEAGUERED CITY ……………………………………. 21

III.   NATIONAL SOCIALISM ……………………………………… 25

IV.   THE NAZI RALLYS AT NUREMBERG ……………………. 34

V.   THE FOREIGN POLICY OF GERMANY ……………………. 41

VI.   ENGLAND AND GERMANY ………………………………….. 49

VII.   MARCH 7th, A MOST IMPORTANT DATE …………… 54

VIII.   THE REAL ENEMY OF EUROPE ……………………….. 58

IX.   COMMUNISM VERSUS NATIONAL SOCIALISM …… 62

X.   THE UNION OF THE GERMAN PEOPLE …………………. 68

XI.   ACTS OF “AGGRESSION” BY GERMANY ……………… 79

XII.   THE DANCE OF DEATH ……………………………………… 85

XIII.   OUR FUTURE POLICY TOWARDS GERMANY ……. 93

XIV.   THE HITLER YOUTH MOVEMENT ……………………… 100

XV.   THE WINTER HELP ORGANIZATION ………………….. 104

XVI.   NATIONAL SOCIALISM AND THE PROTESTANT

CHURCH ……………………………………………………………………… 109

XVII. ECONOMICS …………………………………………………….. 118

XVIII. THE FOUR YEARS PLAN …………………………………… 138

XIX.   THE GERMAN COLONIES …………………………………. 141

XX.   THE LABOUR FRONT ………………………………………….. 146

XXI.   AGRICULTURE …………………………………………………. 155

XXII. MUNICH AND AFTER ………………………………………… 167

Chapter Ten

THE UNION OF THE GERMAN PEOPLE

OF AUSTRIA AND THE SUDETEN

GERMANS WITH THE GERMAN

 PEOPLE OF THE REICH

Further, it has become self-evident to me that those frontier districts between Czechoslovakia and Germany where the Sudeten population is in an important majority should be given full right of self-determination at once. If some cession is inevitable, as I believe it to be, it is as well that it should be done promptly and without procrastination. There is real danger, even a danger of civil war, in the continuance of a state of uncertainty. Consequently there are very real reasons for a policy of immediate and drastic action. Any kind of plebiscite or referendum would, I believe, be a sheer formality in respect of these predominantly German areas. A very large majority of their inhabitants desire amalgamation with Germany. The inevitable delay involved in taking a plebiscite vote would only serve to excite popular feelings, with perhaps most dangerous results. I consider, therefore, that these frontier districts should at once be transferred from Czechoslovakia to Germany, and, further, that measures for their peaceful transfer, including the provision of safeguards for the population during the transfer period, should be arranged forthwith by agreement between the two Governments.

(Vide: Runciman Report No. 7, 1938)

The rise of the Austrian people in rebellion against Schuschnigg in a few hours, the fall of Schuschnigg from power, the telegram from Dr. Seyss-Inquart, the head of the new government, to Hitler to send troops to preserve order, the triumphant march of the soldiers of the Reich into Austria, received with acclamations of joy by the Austrian people, and the progress of Hitler through the country received with such scenes of enthusiastic welcome as are unparalleled in history, took the people of this country completely by surprise. They had been carefully educated in the belief that the “independence” of Austria, that is their separation from Germany, was the wish of the Austrian people.

[Page 69]

The facts that the Austrian Parliament in 1918-19 passed a unanimous vote in favour of union with the Reich, and that Dollfuss finding that if he held an election the vote would be in favour of the Anschluss, had abolished parliament and made himself a dictator, that Schuschnigg his successor had never dared to hold an election, that 40,000 Austrians were in exile across the frontier and thousands in prison without trial, and that Schuschnigg only held power by an armed police with the forces of the allies behind him, made no impression on the people of this country, deceived by a skillful propaganda. Many still believe that Hitler has seized Austria by force of arms against the wishes of the Austrian people. It is a new feature in the history of invasions, for the guns of the invaders to be decorated with wreaths of flowers by the invaded.

In order to get a correct understanding of the real attitude of the great mass of Austrian people, it is necessary to go back to what happened when the war was ended. The quarrel between Austria and Germany which ended in the battle of Sadowa in 1866, was really a quarrel between the two dynasties, the Hohenzollerns and the Habsburgs for supreme power over the German speaking peoples. By the defeat of Austria the Hohenzollerns became supreme, and in 1879 an alliance was formed between the two countries by Bismarck, which led to Germany supporting Austria in her quarrel with Serbia in 1914. During four years Germans of the Reich and Austrian Germans had fought side by side. The long struggle against almost the world whole and the humiliation of defeat which they both suffered welded them together into one people.

On the fall of the Habsburg dynasty, the German Austrians formed a Council of State, and on the 9th of November 1918, this Council of State sent a message to Chancellor Max von Baden of the German Reich:

“In this hour of great historical crisis the German-Austrian Council of State sends to the German people its fraternal greetings and the warmest wishes for its future. The German-Austrian Council of State expresses the hope that the German people in Austria will have a part in the election of representatives of the Constitutive National Assembly which is to decide the future political order of the German nation.”

[Page 70]

On November 12th 1918, the Provisional Assembly for German Austria passed the following law:

“German Austria is a part of the German Republic. Special laws are to regulate the participation of German Austria in the legislation and administration of the German Republic, as well as the extent of the validity of laws and institutions of the German Republic as applied to German Austria.”

On November 30th 1918, the Reich government passed the following decree:

“If the German National Assembly resolves that Austria in accordance with her wish is to be admitted to the German Reich, then the German-Austrian deputies shall join the Assembly as members with equal rights.”

On February 4th 1919, President Dr. Dinghofer addressed the German-Austrian National Assembly as follows:

“Most honourable National Assembly. The day after tomorrow on February 6th, the newly elected Constitutive National Assembly of the German Republic in Weimar meets for the first time. The conditions whereby we participate in the same as rightful members have not yet been reached and indeed not yet created. Nevertheless we cannot ignore this great and significant event. The idea of Greater Germany is not dead for us Germans in these provinces, and never, never was it dead.

Like a star glowing out of the darkness the joyous hope of the realization of our longing dream beckons us: in all the sorrow and all the care that now surround us there glows the hope of lasting reunion with our old Motherland. With the greatest enthusiasm we therefore greet our brothers yonder in the Reich.

We acclaim them with joy. The German people inseparably united in its entirety, no longer separated by boundary-posts, no longer separated by the jealousy of rulers, shall and must become our homeland again.”

[Page 71]

In his opening speech at the first session of the German National Assembly at Weimar on February 6th 1919, the people’s deputy, Friedrich Ebert spoke as follows:

“… We also cannot forego the union of the whole German nation in one Reich. Our German Austrian brothers have already declared themselves part of the Greater-German Republic at their National Assembly on November 12th. Now the German Austrian National Assembly has once again amid the greatest enthusiasm sent its greetings and expressed the hope that our National Assembly and theirs will succeed in re-establishing the link that was broken by force in 1866. German Austria must, they say, be united with the motherland for all time.”

At Weimar on 21st February 1919, the following motion was made by the deputies Lobe, Grober, Haase (Berlin), Von Payer, Dr. Count von Posadowsky-Wehner and Dr. Stresemann:

“May the National Assembly resolve: The National Assembly notes with lively satisfaction the resolutions by which the representatives of German Austria have declared their membership of the German people as a whole. It affirms to its German Austrian brothers that the Germans of the Reich and of Austria constitute an indivisible unit, transcending former state boundaries, and expresses the confident hope that through the negotiations to be entered upon by the governments this inner unity will soon find in settled political forms an expression that will be recognized by all the Powers of the World.”

This motion was supported by all parties in the Assembly.

This movement for union between the Germans of Austria and the Germans of the Reich put the three democracies of Great Britain, France and the United States in a somewhat embarrassing position. They had promised self determination to the peoples of Europe, and both Germany and Austria had elected democratic governments and these democratic governments had unanimously decided to unite. On the other hand, the allies had decided that for strategic reasons this union between Germany and Austria must be prevented, and an “Independent” Austria created. Accordingly on the 29th of December 1918, the French foreign minister M. Pichon made the following statement:

[Page 72]

“There remains the question of German-Austria. It is serious but is should not alarm us. We have means of solving it so that it will not bring our enemies the compensations and resources that they hope from it. In settling the new status of Germany and of the ruins of Austria it will be contingent on the Allied Powers to take measures which will decisively reduce the power of Germany to fit proportions and thus deprive her of the chance of indemnifying herself with the Austrian races remaining outside Czecho-Slovakia, Poland and Yugo-Slavia, for what she will irrevocably have lost in any case by sanctioning our victory. This victory must therefore in the first place be transformed into all its just consequences and into the application of the rights which it gives us over the vanquished, to remove the possibility of these again endangering the security and freedom of the world.”

Article 80 of the Treaty of Versailles was as follows:

“Germany acknowledges and will respect strictly the independence of Austria, within the frontiers which may be fixed in a treaty between that State and the Principal Allied and Associated Powers; she agrees that this independence shall be inalienable, except with the consent of the Council of the League of Nations”, which meant referring it to the Greek Kalends.

The German delegates signed this clause, but made the following protest:

“In Article 80 is demanded the permanent recognition of Austrian independence within the boundaries laid down by the Peace Treaty of the Allied and Associated Governments with Germany. Germany never has had, and never will have the intention of altering the German-Austrian frontier by force.

But should the population of Austria, whose history and culture have been closely linked with its kindred German country for thousands of years, wish to re-established with Germany the connection that was only dissolved recently by a military decision, then Germany cannot pledge herself to oppose the wish of her German brothers in Austria, since the right of self-determination of peoples must apply generally and not solely to the detriment of Germany. Any other procedure would be in contradiction to the principles laid down in the Congress speech of President Wilson on February 11th, 1918.”

In drawing up the constitution of the German Reich, another attempt was made to keep the door open for union with Austria.

The following two clauses were introduced: Article 2.

“The territory of the Reich consists of the territories of the German countries. Other territories can be admitted to the Reich by law if their population desires it in accordance with the right of self-determination.”

[Page 73]

Article 61, par. 2.

“After union with the German Reich, German Austria shall receive the right of participating in the Reich Council with the number of votes corresponding with her population. Until such time the representatives of German Austria shall have an advisory vote.”

On September 2nd 1919, the following note was sent by President Clemenceau to the President of the German Reich.

“The Allied and Associated Powers have taken note of the German constitution of August 11th 1919. They confirm that the conditions of Paragraph 2 of Article 61 constitute a formal violation of Article 80 of the Peace Treaty signed at Versailles on June 28th, 1919.

It is a double violation

1. Article 61, in stipulating the admission of Austria to the Reichsrat, likens this Republic to the German provinces which constitute the German Empire; this is incompatible with the observance of Austria’s independence.

2. In allowing and regulating the participation of Austria in the Reichsrat, Article 61 creates a political bond and a common political action between Germany and Austria, in complete contradiction to the independence of the latter.

The Allied and Associated Powers therefore, having reminded the German Government that Article 178 of the German Constitution declares that the ‘conditions of the Treaty of Versailles cannot be affected by the constitution’ summon the German Government to take the proper steps to annul this violation forthwith, by declaring Article 61, paragraph 2, void.

With the reservation as to further measures in the event of refusal, and indeed on the basis of the Treaty (namely, Article 429), the Allied and Associated Powers inform the German Government that this violation of its obligations in an essential point will oblige the Powers to extend their occupation immediately on the right bank of the Rhine, if their just demand be not complied with within 14 days of the date of this note.”

[Page 74]

The clause was withdrawn.

Since then the agitation for the Anschluss has never ceased, and has grown in intensity as Germany under Hitler once more became a free nation.

After the abortive rising and the deplorable assassination of Dollfuss, the movement in favour of the Anschluss was savagely suppressed.

Staying in Salzburg at the time, we saw young peasants from the hills being marched in as prisoners. The Castle was full of prisoners and several were shot without trial although they had not been near Vienna and could have had nothing to do with the assassination.

When Schuschnigg broke all his promises to Hitler, and announced his travesty of a plebiscite, the Austrian pot boiled over. There was no register of voters, no arrangements to protect the secrecy of the ballot, and only one voting card with “Independent Austria, Heil Schuschnigg, Ja” printed on it. Anyone wishing to vote No, had to cut out a card of the same size, write on it No and hand it openly to Schuschnigg officials who were the only people allowed at the polling stations, with the probability of arrest and imprisonment.

On the 11th of March the following telegram was sent by Dr. Seyss-Inquart to Hitler:

“The provisional Government of Austria which, after the resignation of the Schuschnigg government, consider it their duty to restore calm and order in Austria, direct to the German Government the urgent request to support them in their duty and to help them in preventing bloodshed. To this end they ask the German Government to send German troops as soon as possible.”

After the receipt of this telegram, German troops marched in and the Anschluss was accomplished without the loss of a single life.

The Sudeten Germans

At the time when I am finishing this book, the governments of Europe have solved the vexed problems of the Sudeten Germans, and the Hungarians forcibly included in CzechoSlovakia, — another inheritance from the peace treaties.

[Page 75]

Czecho-Slovakia contains Germans, Slovaks, Hungarians, Poles, Rumanians, Ruthenians and Czechs, and over all these alien people bundled together by the framers of the peace treaties into one nation, the Czechs have a small majority which has enabled them under the outward form of democracy to keep supreme power in their own hands. Lord Balfour declared when the State of Czecho-Slovakia was brought into existence, that these new European States were built up on the principle of little nations on the victorious side seizing the territories of a country that was defeated, and holding them on a cut-throat basis which cannot be defended. None of these various races love one another, but all are agreed on a hatred of Czech domination, and both the Germans and the Slovaks have petitioned the League for freedom and independence.

There can be no question that the Sudeten Germans have suffered cruelly under Czech rule. The glass industry has been allowed to fall into decay, they are denied equality of political rights, they have great difficulty in getting employment, and a large number are slowly dying of starvation. The statistics as to disease from malnutrition among the German children are appalling. Until recently thousands have been imprisoned without trial.

Their terrible condition has naturally excited the greatest indignation among their German brothers in the Reich, and Hitler’s task has been to prevent any rash act on either side of the frontier which might lead to war.

The reason why all Europe was so interested in CzechoSlovakia is because Bohemia now part of Czecho-Slovakia, surrounded by mountains, is the natural citadel of central Europe. It is for this reason that the treaty between the Czechs and the Soviet was so dangerous. If Bohemia were in possession of the Soviet army, they could accomplish that Asiatic conquest of Europe which has so nearly happened more than once in the past. The treaty has now been denounced and the door for an inroad into Europe of Asiatic hordes under the flag of the hammer and the sickle, bolted and barred.

[Page 76]

When the Sudeten German question came to a head, and the pot long simmering boiled over, Hitler had to deal with a very complex situation. The German people were difficult to restrain, the Sudeten Germans were in rebellion and the Communist party in Czecho-Slovakia hoped to use the trouble to promote a European war, while it was impossible to trust Benes who had made so many promises he had never kept in the past.

While a party in Czecho-Slovakia wished to provoke an armed intervention by France, Hitler was doing his best to avoid the necessity. He had only to send an armed force from Austria into Slovakia, and promise independence to all the minorities and home rule to the Slovaks, for Czecho-Slovakia to fall to pieces, a result which the Communists were prepared to face if only France could be persuaded to intervene, — an intervention which Hitler had to do everything he could to prevent.

The Runciman report in favour of the cession of the Sudeten German area to Germany without delay, cleared the air, and when Hitler proposed this solution to Chamberlain at their first meeting, Chamberlain was able to persuade his Cabinet, Daladier and Benes to accept this solution.

Between Chamberlain’s first and second visit to see Hitler, certain incidents had taken place in Czecho-Slovakia which were not reported by our Press, but were witnessed by a friend of mine who was on the spot at the time. My friend entered Prague on September 20th, and found the Czechs very depressed at the thought of giving up the Sudeten German territory. That evening a wireless message was sent out by the Prague station, that Churchill had overthrown Chamberlain, become Prime Minister, and flown to Paris to arrange for war with Germany. Next day Prague was seething with excitement, and bills were posted in the town comparing the, military strength of Germany with the military strength of Great Britain, France, the USSR and the USA. The Prime Minister resigned and M. Hodza became Prime Minister.

In the meantime my friend had motored on to Eger. He arrived on the Wednesday afternoon, and found that the handing over of the Sudeten German area having been agreed to, the Czech government had allowed the Germans to take over the management of the town which was decorated everywhere with the German flag, and the people rejoicing in the streets. The Czech police were arranging to leave the town in the most peaceable manner.

[Page 77]

On the Thursday morning M. Hodza became Prime Minister, and on the Thursday afternoon, a telegram was received from the new government that the Czechs were again going to take over the town. There was a hasty hiding away of flags and decorations, and in the evening the Czech troops marched into a silent town with deserted streets, everyone hiding behind closed doors.

My friend motored on the frontier, and found bridges being blown up and machine gun emplacements being erected. It was evident that Benes had made up his mind for one last gamble for war, and that the message sent out by the new government that they adhered to the handing over of the Sudeten German area, was merely intended to put off time.

All these facts were of course known to Hitler, and caused him to draw up his ultimatum for immediate entry.

His proposal that Czech troops should retire and the German troops advance into the area was the only plan to prevent bloodshed between the Czech and German population. Runciman had already stated that it was necessary to act quickly to prevent civil war, and it is difficult to understand why Chamberlain rejected a plan which was unanimously adopted by the four powers a week later.

The ultimatum drawn up by Hitler might have been written in a more conciliatory manner, but the map accompanying it agreed closely with the map already prepared, and with the territory ultimately given up, and no difficulty was found in adhering to the time table he had originally drawn up. The flight of some of the Czechs from the Sudeten German area was quite unnecessary, as was proved by the quiet occupation of the area by the German troops without any disturbance of the existing population. The fact is that the Continental peasant from long and bitter experience over many centuries, whenever he hears of the approach of an army packs up his household goods and bolts.

During the interview with Chamberlain, Hitler for the first time threatened to use force and enter the Sudeten area even though opposed by Czech troops if it was not ceded at once. It seems to me inconceivable that we would have plunged Europe into war because Hitler insisted on an immediate occupation of territory which had already been ceded to him, millions of lives being sacrificed over a dispute about a time table.

[Page 78]

Hitler had pledged himself in his speech on March 7th 1936, that all adjustments of territory between Germany and other nations should be made by agreement and has carried out his pledge, though he seemed to come near to breaking it. It is probable that at the last moment Benes would have yielded as he could only trust the Czechs in his army, the whole Sudeten German population would have risen behind his troops, and Czech-Slovakia would have fallen to pieces though no German soldier had advanced beyond the Sudeten German area.

It is significant of the condition to which the German population had been reduced, that Hitler said that on his entry he had seen for the first time people weeping for joy and that the first thing the German troops had to do was to bring in large quantities of bread for the starving people.

Extract from Czech Schoolbook

“Who loves the Czechs — Hail to him! Long life to him!”

“Who loves the Russians — Hail to him! Long life to him!”

“Who loves the Serbs — Hail to him! Long life to him!”

“Who loves the Slovenes — Hail to him! Long life to him!”

“Who loves the Hungarians — Strike him down!”

“Who loves the Germans — Strike him down!”

[Page 79]

Chapter Eleven

ACTS OF “AGGRESSION” BY GERMANY

In order to get a true perspective towards what has taken place in Central Europe during the last five years, it is necessary to grasp the fact that what we have been witnessing is a rebellion of the German peoples in Central Europe against the peace treaties.

Hitler has been the leader, and the Nazi movement the spear head, but the rebellion was not confined to Germany, but included the German population of Austria and the Sudeten German area.

The allies had made an “Independent” state of Austria in spite of the unanimous vote of the first Austrian parliament for union with the Reich, and had handed over the Sudeten Germans to the Czechs in spite of their protests, for purely strategic reasons.

Dollfuss in order to maintain Austria as an independent state had to abolish the Austrian parliament, and rule as an absolute dictator, and Schuschnigg had to continue this policy. The Nazi movement progressed at first more rapidly in Austria than in Germany.

Once we have grasped the central fact that we have been witnessing a rebellion of the German peoples, all that has happened in the last five years falls into place and becomes intelligible.

Having risen in rebellion against the articles in the peace treaties which applied to them, they have re-armed, have occupied with troops their own frontiers, and have taken over the administration of their own rivers, railways and canals.

In addition the German people of Austria have joined with the German people of the Reich under one government.

[Page 80]

All these acts have taken place within territory inhabited by and belonging to the German people, and have in no way interfered with the rights of any other nation. In addition, with the consent of the three powers and of the government of CzechoSlovakia, the Sudeten German area has been joined to the Reich.

This addition to German territory was advised by our commissioner Lord Runciman, and has been described by Sir John Simon as an act of justice.

We are told by the enemies of Germany in this country that these acts of the German people were aggressive, violent and illegal acts, and we must proceed to examine these three accusations.

An act of aggression involves interference with other nations. It is not regarded by us as an aggressive act on our part to spend vast sums on munitions, or if we chose to do so to introduce conscription. If the Union between England and Scotland was taking place to-day, it could not be described by other nations as an act of aggression on our part. As all these re-adjustments made by German peoples took place in territory which contained an almost totally German population, we must give a verdict of not guilty when they are accused of acts of aggression.

The second accusation is that the German people have acted in a violent manner. As all these changes have been accomplished in a perfectly orderly way amid the rejoicing consent of the populations concerned, and without the loss of a single life, the charge of violence falls to the ground. There are people in this country who talk of the “invasion” of Austria. An “invasion” in which the people of the “invaded” country decorate the guns of the “invader” is something new in history.

The third accusation of having acted in an illegal manner is made under two heads. They are accused of breaking international law by tearing up the Treaty of Versailles, and also of acting against the protests of the League of Nations.

Let us begin by examining the first accusation. It has long been the custom among civilized nations who have been at war, after an armistice has been declared, for the delegates of both nations to meet in conference and draw up a treaty together.

Such a treaty is regarded as binding on both parties until owing to changing circumstances one party or the other denounces the treaty and a new treaty is drawn up. It has also always been understood that no act of war takes place after the armistice has been signed.

[Page 81]

The allies when engaged in drawing up the Treaty of Versailles, departed from both these customs which have been recognised by all civilized nations. The Treaty of Versailles was drawn up by the allies without the German delegates being admitted. They were then called in and graciously allowed to suggest certain modifications which were promptly rejected, and told to sign. They signed under protest, and said that the German people would never regard the treaty as binding. The second departure from civilized practice was the continuance after the armistice had been signed of the blockade which was starving the German people. The signature of the German delegates was made the condition for raising the blockade.

A treaty between two nations is of the nature of a contract between two men, and both parties are expected to carry it out. But if one of the parties after signing the contract can convince the judge that he signed it by compulsion with a pistol held to his head, no court would uphold the contract.

In the case of the entry into the neutral zone of the German troops, there is a plausible case against Germany. Her defence is that France, by making a treaty with the Soviet directed against Germany, had already torn up the Treaty of Locarno, and was fully warned of the view that would be taken of this act in Germany. Even if the verdict goes against Germany, and she did commit an illegal act, the crime of occupying your own territory with your own troops cannot be regarded as a very serious one.

The other accusation is that Germany acted in an illegal manner in. defying the protests of the League of Nations. The victorious powers decided to set up a perpetual committee which they invited other nations to join, and which they called the League of Nations. Germany was excluded at the beginning and the USA. washed their hands of the whole affair. The main object of the League was to keep the peace treaties inviolate, but it also took on other international duties. Those joining it signed a covenant promising not to make war on each other, but to refer matters of dispute to the League, and in certain articles the League took power to use force through its members against any nation which it had named as an aggressor.

[Page 82]

The League arrogated to itself a legal status which would not be recognised in international law. It had no more authority over other nations than any other alliance of the powers. The members of the League were of course bound by the terms of their contract while they remained members but if they chose to leave the League, the League had no jurisdiction over them and protests passed by the League had no more legal status than if they had been passed by a Mothers Meeting.

International law has grown up slowly through certain customs being finally accepted by all nations, and it is possible that if a League of Nations had been formed at some time before the war when the whole world was at peace, and had in the first instance been a voluntary body with no compulsory powers, it might in time have been recognised by all nations that its decisions were binding; but a League set up by the victors after a war to enforce the maintenance of a status quo which was intolerable to the conquered nations, was doomed to failure. We must therefore return a verdict of not guilty under the second accusation of illegal action.

The German peoples have only claimed and taken such rights as are granted to all nations, and have carried out their programme among themselves and within their own territory with the exception of the union of the Sudeten German area to the Reich which was done with the consent of the other three powers. Such action is neither aggressive, violent nor illegal, and in no way injures the interests of external powers.

Another accusation made against Germany that she uses the threat of force while the League and the Democracies confine themselves to sweet reasonableness and would never use a potential force to get their own way. They blame Hitler for having re-armed Germany. Surely that is an absurd accusation when France at the time he re-armed had an army of five hundred thousand men on a peace footing, and the Soviet an army of one million three hundred thousand men.

[Page 83]

Hitler has only once threatened to use force, when he stated that after a certain date he would if necessary force his way into the territory already assigned to him.

The fact is that in the present crude and barbaric conditions of the relations between nations, every nation has to be “well heeled” before going into a conference.

The allies used potential force to compel the Germans to sign the Treaty of Versailles and to prevent the union of Austria with Germany, and the League refused all concessions to Germany, and ignored the appeals of minorities in Czecho-Slovakia, because behind the League was the army of France.

It is now generally agreed that the Versailles Treaty was most unjust to Germany, but if Germany had not defied the League and begun to re-arm, she would to-day be in the position she was in 1932. Concessions are not made by one nation to another nation because they are just, but because it is dangerous to refuse.

It is true that Chamberlain agreed to the cession of the Sudeten German area because he thought it was just and right, and there are instances in our history when we have acted even to our own detriment on the merits of a case; but I know of no instance of such an action by any other nation except ourselves.

The whole conception of the League as a super state was built on a foundation of force, and the complaint of the parties of the Left in this country is not that the League was built on a foundation of force, but that when the time for action came the whole machine broke down, the various members of the League refusing to fight. In reply to a statement that we had forty nations behind us over the Abyssinian question, Chamberlain said, “Yes, they are behind us but not by our side”.

It is only fair to say that the Opposition claim that the mere threat by the League would be sufficient if it was properly organised for military action; but there always is the danger that the other side will call your bluff. A revolver charged with blank cartridges is a dangerous weapon when going into a quarrel.

[Page 84]

We are re-arming to-day not because Great Britain or the Empire is in the slightest danger from attack, but because we want to go into any discussion with any other power as “well heeled” as they are.

When Hitler says “the army is Germany”, has not that lesson been taught him by all that has happened since the Armistice was signed? If after the signing of the Armistice the army of Germany though in retreat had still been in being, the Treaty of Versailles would have been a very different document. Would France have entered the Ruhr if there had been the German army to oppose her? An unarmed nation will get no justice from the other nations.

Hitler says “the army is Germany”. Is it not equally true that our navy is the British Empire? We have built the Empire by force, we hold it by force, and we will defend it by force, and we possess it intact to-day because our navy is far stronger the the navy of any other Power.

“Ah”, my critic will reply, “the League, the Allies, France and Great Britain only use force in a just and righteous cause. All other nations and more especially Germany and Italy use it in an unrighteous cause”, which reminds me of a story told me by my father. When he was a boy Scotland was under the tyranny of a rigid Sabbatarianism. One day he was scolded for having laughed on the Sabbath day. He retorted that he had heard the minister laugh on the Sabbath. “Ah”, was the reply, “but that was a Holy smile”.

[Page 85]

======================================