Wikipedia: Heimatvertriebene/Talk

If you can, clean up these stubs and figure out where they should go...right now they're eiter out of place or confusingly written

: See Silent Ethnic Cleansing for a description of the modern political...

: The Volksdeutschen had lived in lands, that were once part of the Holy Roman Empire of Germany. They came from lands, which at times were ruled by German or Holy Roman Empire connected rulers, were given German Rights as German settlers. In the case of Bohemia-Germans, they lived in a land for 1200 years part of the Holy Roman Empire and in earlier years German lands.

: The Bohemia-Germans (later known as Sudeten-Germans) and the people of parts of Silesia, Posen-West Prussia, formerly German citizens had since 1919 lived in a newly created "Polish Corridor" and millions were already chased out by brutal suppression from Polish and Czech Slavs between 1919 and 1939.

This really needs a reference; the passive voice is sketchy:

: The figure of lost lives is estimated at a minimum 2 1/2 million Germans. Several calculations show millions more.)

Why the should this be in talk? Isnt this history?

: Because it shouldn't be in this entry. --TheCunctator

Didn't want to edit Heimatvertriebene while you were, but it's exactly the same as her Expellees article, which I redirected to Diaspora Studies and gave it its own section called The Plight of the... JHK

Why am I redirecting this (or trying to)?

This article (in different forms) appears in several other places under different titles.

In an attempt to place this information in this article in the appropriate historical context, I included a version (edited only for grammatical errors and rearranged into chronological order) into the article on Diaspora Studies and redirected the original Expellees and Heimatvertriebene article to that page.

Heimatvertriebene (the -en ending reflects a non-nominative case ending and is incorrect) should be the German article of the title -- if we must use it at all. The term is one loaded with political meaning in German, and is ONLY used in the case of this particular group of people. Otherwise, every other group of people driven from their homes, whether as part of an act of genocide/ethnic cleansing or not, are referred to as simply "refugees," i.e., these people may have been fleeing something, but they weren't driven from their HOMELAND...

Granting this subject its own article validates the very dubious theory that the lands where these so-called ethnic Germans lived in some way belonged (and, to follow recent postings, morally still belong) to Germany because they have always been inhabited by Germans. The evidence posted thereto has no foundation in accepted historical method and is often downright incorrect.

That's why I think it should be redirected -- although recent edits should probably be incorporated into the Diaspora studies article.

I tried to explain this yesterday (see above) and also to post on the Heimatvertriebenen/Talk page, but the system said that page didn't exist, so I'm posting here...JHK

Sorry to annoy you. Perhaps you should take a look at the background, especially the Wilhelm Gustloff/Talk page, before you judge too harshly. Had you noticed it at the time, you would have seen in my posting comment that the Diaspora article was thrown together quickly and that I threw it open to the world for editing. It was a genuine attempt to take what appeared to be valid historical information and put it in a place more appropriate, rather than just editing out what were a series of "all these places were taken from the Germans" entries. Also, I did try to contact you about the redirects and what I think is pretty much pointless editing by posting on your page when I saw you were working on this stuff. If you disagree after reading my comments on the talk pages concerned, then please tell me where you disagree. There's really no getting away from the fact that the subject as introduced to the wikipedia is very loaded and has been reduced to irrelevency. I really liked some of your edits, but think they might do better in other places. JHK

Please note that Rolf-Josef Eibicht can be found on the Informationsdienst gegen Rechtsextremismus website. This is a web site devoted to profiling right-wing extremists in (mostly) Germany and Austria. As far as I can tell, Eibicht balances on the edge of legality (in Germany -- American free speech laws are more liberal). His works are published by a publisher that specializes in far-right extremist political tracts. I think that it is really not a good idea to base articles on such sources... oh -- heres's the link http://www.idgr.de/lexikon/bio/e/eibicht-rj/eibicht.html JHK

JHK -- It's not based on Eibicht; I merely included his quotation and noted that he is an extremist. He was not the source of the information in the article. It's some H. Jonat assertions but mostly stuff I could confirm elsewhere; thus the large Charta section, which is a nice happily historical document. --TheCunctator

: I saw that -- you just put nationalist, and I thought it was a continuation of the earlier stuff. I still think that it needs more pointing out, i.e., that this is a view that has been coopted by the right wing...JHK

Definitely. Fuller entries on Eibicht and modern right-wing German nationalism would help provide more context. I think Heimatvertriebene is why I spent so much time trying to contruct accurate nationalism articles, so it's clear what one is getting into. --TheCunctator

I would very much like to see a reference for this (that is, which candidate?):

The current Bundesregierung declared , that they are not aware of the speech by then US Presidential Candidate to the German/American?? Institute , where he strongly condemned the ethnic cleansings and especially pointed to the 15 to 16 million Germans, mostly women and children, expelled from Eastern Europe.

Also, this is another typically unconnected statement. I'd also like more clarification on people taking things into their own hands -- in what way? Who? since it is right above the stuff on the right wing, are we talking about them?

In general, the new additions aren't very well-thought out. There is a definite implication here that the CDU are the good guys and the SPD the bad guys -- not very NPOV. Also, we need a better translation for Heimatvertriebene if we are to let this article remain -- the translation is literally "the driven from their homeland ones" -- the political meaning is one of Germans driven from their homes -- and nowhere does the article deal with the intricacies of the situation -- like the fact that many of the Heimatvertriebene lost their homes/homeland because previous German governments had placed their ancestors there as colonists in newly acquired lands...JHK

To JHK 1.)Pres. candidate , see : [[1]] Hartmut Koschyk :Bundesregierung weiss, dass sie nichts weis. In other parts it shows ,that the SPD current government cut funds almost in half for upkeep of Cultural treasures/studies of Vertriebene, which is in the laws called : "Bundesvertriebenengesetz" .

: Please don't ask people to go dig information out of web sites -- the correct answer is George W Bush, and where he gave the speech and in what context. By the way, the web site actually edits out part of the quote, so it's hard to tell exactly what he said, but clear he was talking about the Heimatvertriebene.

2.)people "taking matters into their own hands" , is a phrase , that whenever someone does not do their job (a boss-the emploees, leader- general public)start doing, writing, handling whatever , individually.

: Thank you for explaining English -- but that is not exactly what it means. The way you have used it, it can imply vigilantism or other extremist illegal action -- is this what you are saying? if you are, it might be wise to re-characterize it, because one can easily infer that you think this kind of action is ok

3.) Heimatvertriebene - that word says everything. Translation: homeland expellees ? Vertriebene is more that just expelled, more like hounded out by brutal military and civilian forces.

4.) "They did not lose homes or homeland/ because previous German governments had placed their ancestors there as colonists in newly aquired lands. " They had lived in land that was either native homeland of Germany/Germania?, or in South- Eastern Europe they were brought in by the rulers of those lands, which where part of or connected to the Holy Roman Empire(by contract or marriage). Others were forcibly sent to Siberia where they had to build cities , rockets and mines for the Soviet Union . They lost homes or lives ,because of 'Panslavism' , ethnic and communist movements. They lost homes and lives,because they fought against communist take-over of Europe and lost.

: I'm sorry, Helga, but you have just done the very thing that tends to make people question your writing. You have (deliberately?) taken something I said above and re-stated it out of context to argue against something I DIDN'T say, rather than addressing something I DID say. What I SAID was that the article did not take into account the intricacies of the situation. My example is the fact that MANY (not all, please note) of the Germans who became Heimatvertriebene came from colonization movements by previous MODERN (after around 1750) German governments -- particularly the 2nd and 3rd Reichs. This is provable fact. It doesn't negate the fact that these people were themselves perfectly innocent. It just shows that the wars and treaties of the past can still affect people today.

5.) I found the website with R. Eibicht text : http://www.dingolfing.org/members/mies-pilsen/sudeten.htm another website: http://www.csu.de/DieThemen/Positionen_A-Z/Innenpolitik/1Heimatvertriebene.htm

: Doesn't it make you just a little ill to know that you are using the words of a right-wing extremist who is known to have a following among neo-Nazis to support your position?

-- To JHK To 2. and 5.) I do not condone any vigilantism or illegal activity. I merely explained , that that could happen, when a people such as Vertriebene have been disregarded ignored or worse in English speaking countries , became a none-event (The "Vertreibung" has not been acknowledged , "it never happened ") I have never met, talked to or even heard of Ralf Eibicht until someone posted this on wiki- Heimatvertriebene. I think , that it should not even be on this page. But since someone posted it, I did find the complete text on altavista and I posted this .It seems obvious , that he is from Sudetenland, which was 'given' to Tchechoslowakia after 1918 . On your socalled "modern Colonization movements of German governments after 1750' , you may want to read the 'Russian" governments invitations to come and build up their lands. Apparently after they buit it up , they were no longer needed. There are 5 mill "Germans from Russia" in the USA alone, whose ancestors left Russia after 1830/60, when Russians took over and wanted to force people to speak Russian only and take away the rights, that were promised to those Germans in Russia earlier.

They were not colonization movements of German governments. But since you said that, does that mean , that you believe that colonists, have no rights and can any time be forcibly expelled ?

H. Jonat

: If you don't support vigilantism, perhaps you could add more information about people who actually have taken the law into their own hands (fact), or re-write to something less incendiary, like "The resulting frustration on the part of survivors and their families had led to many grass-roots efforts for recognition"

: They are not so-called. Both the German Empire and the Third Reich settled colonists in territories they acquired through warfare. In fact, Hitler replaced many of the Poles he sent to labor camps with loyal Germans, specifically in order to help keep a firm grasp on Poland. I agree that there were many instances where Germans went elsewhere at the invitation of foreign governments; however, whenever you have spoken about the Heimatvertriebene, you have placed emphasis on the events immediately after the second world war -- I hardly see how ethnic Germans leaving Russia in the 1860s has anything to do with events 100 years later.

"After 1750 - those are people brought in by Catherine the Great and later; Wolga-Germans, etc." "They were not colonization movements of German governments. But since you said that, does that mean , that you believe that colonists, have no rights and can any time be forcibly expelled ?"

To that question , your answer:

: For the last part, I challenge anyone on this site to show where I have ever implied that I support any kind of genocide or other atrocity. I am simply asking that this article be more than a furtherance of one political agenda. At present, it does not present a complete picture, and is therefore not a very good article. JHK

The whole subject is irrational. Anyone connected to this event cannot be totally rational.

Now you, unconnected you, YOU even posting irrational challenges.

I do think, your statement is really good , lets put that in: (For me I see too much red, to come up with such a simple explanation) "The resulting frustration on the part of survivors and their families had led to many grass-roots efforts for recognition"</i> H. Jonat

: Thanks. I think that perhaps that's a lot of the problem here. We all know that this subject is personally close to you, and its inherent injustice doesn't always allow you to look at the longer-term picture. Those of us not personally affected are more likely to be objective. You are right in that the Volga-Germans are modern -- but my impression from everything you've written is that most of the Heimatvertriebene were people settled in areas other than Russia -- specifically in parts of the Baltic and/or present day Poland that have been in dispute between "Polish" and "German" governments over several centuries. Moreover, you've always made it sound like something that happened after WWII and directly linked to Communist takeover -- so the emigration (or exile) of ethnic Germans from Russia in the 1860s doesn't seem connected. It's only recently that you've mentioned Pan-Slavism as a driving force.

: <As for the rest, I only offered the challenge in response to your final question -- of course I don't believe that! As a historian, though, I do believe that we have an obligation to point out even the things that don't fit in with our theories. Even if the reaction was totally unjust and qualifies as an atrocity, it makes sense to mention German governmental colonization and also the fact that (perhaps -- I don't KNOW this, but think it likely from what I do know of the end of WWII) some of the Heimatvertriebene situation occorred and was possibly even tolerated by the winners of the war as a gut reaction to the Holocaust. It doesn't make it right, but we have seen all too many cases where innocent people are punished for sometimes centuries of their governments actions. To understand why things happen, we have to present all the facts.</i> JHK