Was Austria considered a occupied territory?

[WilliSaenger]

The timeline is about this:

In 1938 the "Anschluss" in fact was in many parts of Austria a Nazi revolution from within. Eg in Innsbruck, where Nazis took over, before German troops crossed the borders. Most Austrians welcomed the "Anschluss" but some had the illusion, that Austria would remain in some way independent under the cover of Greater Germany. So the first shock for these people (not to mention the Jews and Socialists, etc. who were arrested immediately) came, when the name Austria was changed into Ostmark and historical states where renamed. Oberösterreich became Gau Oberdonau, Niederösterreich Niederdonau, Vorarlberg lost it's independence and became part of Gau Tirol und Vorarlberg, ....

In 1943 the Allies for the first time talked about what to do with Germany, once it was defeated. And they distinguished between Germany and it's victims. From then on it was clear for people, who wished back an independent Austria, that they had to make clear to the Allies, that Austria was the first of many victims of Hitler. The little problem, as mentioned above, was, that Austria did in no way oppose the "Anschluss". There was not one single shot oft the Austrian Army ringing at the border in March of 1938...

Therefore Austrian politicians after the end of WW II put a lot of time and work into convincing the Allies, that they were victims, not the villains. That was more or less easy with the western Allies, but harder with the Soviets. But they finally succeded in 1955, when the Allies signed the "Staatsvertrag" and Austria became independent.

To the questions, if Austrians are feeling as Germans or not: Between WW I and WWII many Austrians would have answered: Of course we are Germans. This oppinion lasted very long. Even in the 1960ies and 70ies some people argumented, that the Austrian National Holiday on October 26th should not be called Nationalfeiertag, because Austria is only a Country, but part of the German nation... But today most Austrians feel as Austrians and nothing else. Except maybe a small group of hardcore Neonazis.

[vszulc]

In Beevors Stalingrad, theres an interesting section that deals with the 6th army in Soviet POW camps. It was let known that soldiers from countries occupied by Nazi Germany (and by extension of that thought, also victims of Nazi aggression) would get better rations and treated better than the fascist Germans.

To the consternation and disbelief of the German soldiers, all of a sudden their Austrian colleagues (who had been their kameraden just weeks earlier... Question of whether someone was an "Austrian" or "German" had never come up before) would let the Soviets know that they were Austrians and certainly not Germans.

So at least in 43, there were examples of Soviets considering Austria an occupied territory.

[DeutschesReich]

It's just back then no Austrians even opposed the Anschluss and it was even attempted in 1918 so how come Austrians now don't feel as Germans anymore when they are ethnic Germans?

[WilliSaenger]

vszulc: As I said. In the "Mooscow Decalaration" of 1943 Austria was seen as maybe the first victim of Hitlers aggression but in the declaration is also said, that Austrians had to show resistance in some way at least for the rest of the war to proof their role as victims.

Reich: I think, that was not a question of "Lesson learned, never ever with the Germans together...". It was more a question of growing self-confidence. After 1955 Germany's economy was growing fast during the so called "Wirtschaftswunder". Austria was always a bit behind and was seeing itself as poorer little brother. Germans came to Austria on vacation and showed their wealth and all their Mercedes's and Porsches. This changed during the last 20 years. In some branches now Austrias economy is way in front and Austrians see themselfs not any longer as little brother. One reason for this was of course, that Germany had to deal with the financial aftermath of the reunion of the Germanies.

[Bernaschek]

It's just back then no Austrians even opposed the Anschluss and it was even attempted in 1918 so how come Austrians now don't feel as Germans anymore when they are ethnic Germans?

While everything Willi Saenger wrote is correct in my eyes, you also have to see that we are not the same people. Over a thousand years of quite different history and largely a different religion have made for a different culture.

We usually do feel related with southern Germans, like Bavarians, but we are not that close to "Preussen" or northern Germans.I remember one newspaper publishing some demoscopic data maybe 5 years ago, where a majority of Austrians said they would feel closer to Hungarians, Chechs or Slovenians than Germans, which I find entirely beliveable.

When in 1918 it was declared that "the rest should be Austria", nobody believed, that this sorry rest of an Empire could survive. So a lot of people thought to merge into Germany, or Vorarlberg wanted into Switzerland.

In the 30s the country had shown that it could survive and had Schuschnigg been able to hold his Plebiscit, there is no doubt that a good majority would have voted for staying independent.

Nowadays we have by and large come over our minority complex and an Austrian Identidy has developped. My father went in the late fifties to work in Germany as a "Gastarbeiter" (Guestworker, just like the Turks especially) because he could earn 3 times what he would earn in Austria. He moved back in the late 60s, when I was born.
Nowadays Germans come to Austria to work.
It wasn't only the German problems with Unification that caused Austria to economically close up; that had started in the 70s and sped up with the fall of the Iron Curtain and the EU, when Austria would diversify it's economic fixation with Germany and find new markets and field of investment, especially in the neighbouring countries to the east.

[Mika68*]

What difference is between people in Germany and people in Austria? Same language ,same culture, same origin. Differences between them are same as differences between parts inside Germany.
Naturally Bayern is much more closer to Austria than to Brandenburg.

[history1]

What difference is between people in Germany and people in Austria? Same language ,same culture, same origin. [...]

What´s the difference of people from the USA and from Great Britain? Same language ,same culture, same origin. And what´s about "The Unanimous Declaration of The Thirteen United States of America"?? A few early colonies in 1776 with their aim to establish a new nation - was that realy necessary?

Who "needs" the countries Canada, Australia, New Zealand, etc. when all of these have the same origin (UK), same language and same culture? And even today all has the same Head of State, Queen Elizabeth II.

Back to the roots! Let´s call them Englishmen, it´s much easier.

[WilliSaenger]

The difference, Mika, is history. Of course we share some history with Germany. And it was not the best part of it, I dare say. But there are also hundreds of years, which divide us.

What defines a nation in my point of view, is not the food, or the landscape, or traditional clothing like Lederhosen and Dirndl, but history. And Austrian history is not German history. So Austria is defined by it's history of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. Visible at every second corner in Austrian cities. Austria is defined by it's rivalry with Prussia for 200 years. And so on, and so on...

[labwizard]

Hello,
I just came across this thread, and I can't suppress leaving at least some of my thoughts on it here...

Actually, the word "nation" is from Latin "natio" = "tribe", or "natus" = "born". Therefore, the term "nation" actually refers to a group of people who share a common descent. In a wider sense, the term may additionally cover the presence of more or less assimilated alien minorities.
Today, the term "nation" is most often used with a meaning that has been extremely weakened intentionally for certain ideological reasons. In this sense, it can even be applied to a group of people who do not share a common descent, as long as they share certain formal-legal aspects such as a common government.

Only ca. 8.7 percent of the U.S. population is of English ancestry:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Census-2000-Data-Top-US-Ancestries.jpg
In Canada, ca. 21% are of English ancestry, ca. 16% of French, ca. 15% of Scottish, ca. 14% of Irish, and ca. 10% of German ancestry.

You will always find people in Germany regarding the people in Austria as foreigners, and vice versa, but this is only true under arbitrary legal definitions the people themselves do not have any actual influence on.

It is well known that Schuschnigg had shamelessly designed his "plebiscite" to favor only his own interests. You can read everywhere about the outrageous dirty tricks he had built into its concept... - it's no secret - even after 1945...
And - independent of that fact - remember that it's very easy to openly claim that a good majority would have voted against the Anschluß since here and today, this is the only statement regarded as politically correct...
On the other hand, there was an actual public poll in Austria which resulted in 99.73 percent being pro-Anschluß. - Yes, I know, it's not politically correct not to add a phrase such as "that they were all threatened and tortured and thrown into concentration camps by the Nazis to do so"... - It's on you to think about such statements... (It's always the same: As soon as it comes to any politically relevant aspects, it's the same as participating in a scientific discussion on mathematics with the legal requirement not to deny that 2+2=5 )

And don't forget that as Hitler's troops entered the main Austrian cities, troops from Austria also entered the main Reich's cities such as Munich, Berlin, Dresden, Stuttgart. There wasn't any conquest - it was simply a friendly and peaceful unification... And no-one would have seriously regarded Austria to be an occupied territory - and it actually wasn't until the end of WWII...

Best regards,
Thomas

[history1]

Hello,
I just came across this thread, and I can't suppress leaving at least some of my thoughts on it here...
[...]
And don't forget that as Hitler's troops entered the main Austrian cities, troops from Austria also entered the main Reich's cities such as Munich, Berlin, Dresden, Stuttgart. [...]
Best regards,
Thomas

Please provide source to comply with the forum regulations.

I guess with troops you are meaning the Austrian Legion, unlawful Nazis who fled to Germany:
http://translate.google.com/translate?s ... 1678805%2F

[labwizard]

Dear history1,

if so, almost everyone here does not comply with the forum rules...

However, you are of course right in raising your objection.

I do not mean the Austrian Legion the members of which already migrated to the Reich in 1933/34 - I am speaking about the regular Austrian troops that entered Germany at the time Hitler's troops entered Austria just when the Anschluß happened in 1938.
I've seen photos in contemporary books and cigarette picture albums, and I've read more or less detailed descriptions of it in several pre- and post-1945 history books; some original footage of it can still be viewed here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l6sr-HCJUZU
Also, see this document (PDF-p.13, orig. p.11):
http://library2.lawschool.cornell.edu/donovan/pdf/Batch_7/Vol_XVI_50_01.pdf
The problem is that any sources with contents that do not comply with today's politically correct version are blocked, banned, or simply disappearing in miraculous ways... And the more not-politically-correct sources people refer to, the sooner they themselves will be blocked, banned, or simply disappearing in miraculous ways...
You are on the safe side of it all... - am I now about to disappear...?

[Progmetty]

Thanks for the details labwizard, it's very interesting and makes a lot of sense.

[Bernaschek]

the second link does not exactly boost your claims, I would say and the video, well, it originates not on the left side of the political spectrum, to say the least

that Austrian troops were sent to parades in German cities is correct; why wouldn't the Nazis not use such Propaganda measure ?

You moreless said that Schuchniggs Referendum would have been more manipulated/more of a lie than Adolfs.

That's enough for me;


edit : oh yes : "pre 45 history books" ? politically proof read in Berlin ?

[labwizard]

Dear Bernaschek,

the second link provides a copy of the post-WWII indictment materials officially used against Seyss-Inquart.
It's worth not more or less than comparable materials used against other leading Nazis in the Nuremberg Trials.
Feel free to challenge the truth of its contents...
As I wrote, the first link provides some original footage of the case I referred to. I did not refer to the people who used this footage in exactly this documentation. It is even possible that I would not like them if I knew them personally. I have already indicated that all those sources proving non-politically-correct points of view are systematically removed from public accessibility. Most of them are already inaccessible. That's good for you and bad for me. It's a miracle that I could find anything at all, so please, don't blame me for using non-spectacular source materials that can not change the universe at the first glance. If I had the time, I am sure I would find better ones... - And I am sorry for the video not originating from the left side of the political spectrum as you had wished. I've seen lots of film footage from that side and related sides that have obviously been faked or used in a wrong context and are nevertheless still used for "documentations" (as other kinds of materials, too). Why don't you make any efforts to provide any scientific proof of what you are telling? - Why should I - as a poor guy - pay thousands of dollars (I do not have) for technical examinations to officially verify the authenticity of some materials I am referring to here (and not even in a major case) - whereas the other side (the one also making the laws) has never spent any cent for any scientific proof of what they are telling, and, instead, prohibits on penalty any attempt to find any scientific provings?
I had much to do with agents provocateurs, and I know that - right now - I'm only one small step apart from being banned etc., and I am of course expected to shut up immediately...
However, let me at least say that I came to this forum with a small hope that things are treated with a small amount of objectivity... - Now it seems I've been a naive moron... - People are simply different, and I have to learn to accept that.
I (honestly) beg your pardon for annoying you and/or anyone else here! (And this is not meant sarcastically!)
I will not further disturb your peace...
I wish you all the best!
And a Happy New Year 2012! To all of you!

Thomas

P.S.: Feel free to ban me and/or to delete my postings all over AHF. I promise not to feel hurt in any way!

[Mischa]

Hi,
not by the Germans, in my opinion (99% for the Anschluß), rather by alies and the Soviet until 1955.
Regards
Mischa