Why didn't Hitler advocate Austrian nationalist ideas?

Discussions on the propaganda, architecture and culture in the Third Reich.
Post Reply
Sid Guttridge
Member
Posts: 10158
Joined: 12 Jun 2008, 12:19

Re: Why didn't Hitler advocate Austrian nationalist ideas?

#316

Post by Sid Guttridge » 26 Apr 2018, 18:13

Hi Lamarck,

You post, “The result (of the referendum ) was the outcome of opportunism, ideological conviction, massive pressure, occasional vote rigging and a propaganda machine…..“. You then draw the conclusion, “Vote rigging was only occasional…..Errr, No, I presume what is meant here is that only occasionally were ballot boxes stuffed with entirely fake votes. In fact vote rigging was universal because 100% of the ballot papers were biased towards a “Yes” vote, as you already know. And this is before we get to considering how far “massive pressure” and an entirely one sided “propaganda machine” discredited the result. Nor does “opportunism” sound much like genuine support for Anschluss.

Here is a copy of an original report (ND R-153) dated 10 April 1938, on how the ballot was rigged as quoted on p.595 of Nazism, 1919-1945, Volume 2 (University of Exeter Press, 1991): “Copy of a schedule is attached herewith enumerating the persons who cast “No” votes or invalid votes…… The control was effected in the following way: some members of the election committee marked all the ballot papers with numbers. During the ballot itself, a voters’ list was made up. The ballot papers were handed out in numerical order, therefore it was possible afterwards with the aid of this list to find out persons who cast “No” votes or invalid ones…… The marking was done on the back with skimmed milk.” What is particularly interesting is that it details additional methods of rigging the ballot beyond those described by Albert Goering. It also seems from this that the electoral roll was made up on the day from those who actually turned up to vote, which might help explain the near 100% turn-out reported!

Finally, you write, “Sid, since it is obvious that you do not actually have Bukey's book…..” You clearly must know something I don’t on this score! I have had Bukey’s book sitting here by my monitor for months, and yet you think you know better! A pity you haven’t applied these super powers to the subject in hand! This is yet another example of you pushing beyond available evidence. You may test me if you wish as to contents that are not on Google Books, but once that is over I expect a graceful withdrawal on your part. You can do “graceful”, I take it?

Cheers,

Sid.

Sid Guttridge
Member
Posts: 10158
Joined: 12 Jun 2008, 12:19

Re: Why didn't Hitler advocate Austrian nationalist ideas?

#317

Post by Sid Guttridge » 26 Apr 2018, 18:30

Hi Lamarck,

You continue to be exercised by the "self-selecting" nature of the crowds who greeted the German troops and keep asking for a source. I would repeat my earlier reply:

"You need a source? Are you doubting that the crowds (albeit apparently a minority of the population) were of pro-Anscluss and/or pro-Nazi supporters attending voluntarily? The alternative, that they were somehow press-ganged by the Nazis and forced to smile for the cameras, wouldn’t seem very helpful for your proposition that Austrian support for Anschluss was “overwhelming”! "

I ask again, "Are you doubting that the crowds (albeit apparently a minority of the population) were of pro-Anscluss and/or pro-Nazi supporters attending voluntarily?"

If the answer is "No", you do not doubt it, then the crowds were "self-selecting".

If the answer "Yes", you do doubt it, then you need to tell us who made them go?

I personally believe the crowds who greeted the German invasion with enthusiasm were there voluntarily and were therefore "self-selecting".

I would have thought this point was more of an assistance to your cause than a hindrance, so I am at a loss to understand your objection.

A confused Sid.


User avatar
Lamarck
Member
Posts: 177
Joined: 25 Oct 2017, 18:02
Location: UK

Re: Why didn't Hitler advocate Austrian nationalist ideas?

#318

Post by Lamarck » 27 Apr 2018, 02:18

Hi Sid,

The photo of Hitler announcing the Anschluss on the Heldenplatz on 15 March 1938. Hitler's delivery in Vienna and other places in Austria was massive.

I have already told you before, there is no need to even mention the overall population of the certain city or town. The thousands that turned up justify the use of overwhelming. The crowds were in huge numbers.

I have already told you, I would say roughly between 75%-90% of people genuinely voted for the Anschluss. The Catholics and Socialists counted for 66% and then include the Austrian Nazis and the ordinary Austrians that wanted the Anschluss. There is no evidence to suggest that less than a clear majority voted for the Anschluss.

I've not read anywhere that around 30% would have voted "No" in a free plebiscite. Do you have a source?

I can support the use of 'overwhelming' because at the time of the Anschluss the Austrians were hugely in favour of the Anschluss. I have already told you that I do not doubt that Schuschnigg would have plausibly got a majority to vote for an independent Austria. Another way to put this is that if you were to ask an Austrian today if he or she would vote in favour of an Anschluss and you would more than likely hear "No", timing is key. In April 1938 the vast majority of Austrians were largely in favour of the Anschluss.

You have constantly used the argument that Schuschnigg could have potentially got 66% of Austrians to vote for an independent Austria as prove that in April 1938 the overwhelming majority of Austrians were not in favour of the Anschluss.

Why is it only you that inserts the word "plausible" when describing the clear majority of Austrians in favour of the Anschluss? May I ask, do you genuinely have Bukey's book? He provided more than enough evidence in the book that it is not just plausible but in fact a majority of Austrians were in favour of the Anschluss, Bukey even wrote that on the back of his book.

The Anschluss was totally different to other Nazi annexations. The intimidation was not needed due to the Austrian enthusiasm.

Austrians that were persecuted during and after the Anschluss in Austria were political opponents, it was not because of opposition to the Anschluss.

Unfortunately, the Anschluss helped Austrian anti-semites to unleash their anti-semitism. They were arguably worse than the Reich Germans.

You seem to be under the impression that the crowds were just simply put there by the Nazis. However, this was not the case. I am referring to the initial enthusiasm, not the speeches proclaiming the Anschluss.

Why do you keep mentioning the population of Linz? It is not needed. The crowds that showed up were huge.

Okay, maybe not every single Austrian was advocating the Anschluss publicly but certainly many were favouring it.

Hitler's political achievements in Germany obviously had an impact on the Austrians. Why would the fellow Germans not want to reap the rewards as well? Even before the Nazis had come to power, Austrians had favoured a customs union with Germany in 1931. Economic reasons certainly played a role.

Biased and rigged are not necessarily the same. The coercion to vote "Yes" was certainly there on the ballot paper but an Austrian still had the option to vote "No".

How does your quote of the way the Nazis controlled the plebiscite disqualify the option of voting "No"?

The reason I doubt you have the book is because you have often used the Schuschnigg proposed plebiscite as proof that the Austrians were not largely in favour of the Anschluss but Bukey wrote that the Catholics and the Socialists were won over by the Nazis and could be counted on to vote in favour of the Anschluss.

Provide a source that the crowds were self-selected, the burden of proof is on you.

ljadw
Member
Posts: 15584
Joined: 13 Jul 2009, 18:50

Re: Why didn't Hitler advocate Austrian nationalist ideas?

#319

Post by ljadw » 27 Apr 2018, 09:00

Falsification of the results was very exceptional and was not ordened by Berlin .I have seen results from small villages in Carinthia :in some villages there were a few no votes, in other villages everyone voted yes .This proves that there was no general order to falsify the results and that where 100 % voted yes ,the reason was not falsification, but social pressure .

Sid Guttridge
Member
Posts: 10158
Joined: 12 Jun 2008, 12:19

Re: Why didn't Hitler advocate Austrian nationalist ideas?

#320

Post by Sid Guttridge » 02 May 2018, 17:30

Hi ljadw,

I think it entirely possible that there was no order from Berlin to falsify the results. However, this is no indication that it did not happen.

There is no traceable order from Berlin for the so-called "Holocaust", but Jews were killed by the million anyway.

In the absence of direct orders, the Nazis on the ground tended to try to "work towards the Fuhrer". They read the regimes mood music, tried to interpret the Fuhrer's will from it and acted accordingly. I would suggest that regime was interested in results, not process, and was not too concerned how it was achieved, provided it looked legitimate and could be spun as such.

In Austria there was very probably no need to rig the Anschluss plebiscite at all, if all that was required was a simple majority to legitimize the process, yet the Nazis did so massively both before and during voting. So I would not be overconfident that immediately afterwards, during the count, they were all suddenly gripped by moral rectitude!

Cheers,

Sid.

User avatar
Lamarck
Member
Posts: 177
Joined: 25 Oct 2017, 18:02
Location: UK

Re: Why didn't Hitler advocate Austrian nationalist ideas?

#321

Post by Lamarck » 04 May 2018, 16:19

Sid Guttridge wrote:I think it entirely possible that there was no order from Berlin to falsify the results. However, this is no indication that it did not happen.
In light of the officially calculated 99.7 per cent in Austria in favour of the Anschluss, inevitably there were allegations of vote rigging. Although an uncomfortable truth is that the takeover was nonetheless tremendously popular.
Stephen Tierney, Constitutional Referendums: The Theory and Practice of Republican Deliberation, p. 101.
There is no traceable order from Berlin for the so-called "Holocaust", but Jews were killed by the million anyway.

In the absence of direct orders, the Nazis on the ground tended to try to "work towards the Fuhrer". They read the regimes mood music, tried to interpret the Fuhrer's will from it and acted accordingly. I would suggest that regime was interested in results, not process, and was not too concerned how it was achieved, provided it looked legitimate and could be spun as such.
Red herring. What does this have to do with anything regarding the Anschluss?
In Austria there was very probably no need to rig the Anschluss plebiscite at all, if all that was required was a simple majority to legitimize the process, yet the Nazis did so massively both before and during voting. So I would not be overconfident that immediately afterwards, during the count, they were all suddenly gripped by moral rectitude!

Cheers,

Sid.
Provide a source for your statement.

Sid Guttridge
Member
Posts: 10158
Joined: 12 Jun 2008, 12:19

Re: Why didn't Hitler advocate Austrian nationalist ideas?

#322

Post by Sid Guttridge » 05 May 2018, 14:24

Hi Lamarck,

The first two quotes, mine and yours, are not contradictory. The Anschluss could have been both popular and retrospectively legitimized by vote rigging. Indeed, that could be what Tierney is saying, because I note that he doesn't deny accusations of vote rigging. How could he, when every single ballot papeer was biased in favour of "Yes", as we have already repeatedly established.

Nope, not a "red herring", just indicating a possible explanation as to why there were no traceable orders to rig the Anschluss vote from Berlin. Local Nazis attempted coups in Danzig and Liechtenstein in March 1939 because they believed this was what Berlin wanted, not because Berlin ordered it. The most prominent example of this sort of thing may be the so-called "Holocaust". As I posted earlier and you were kind enough to repeat in a quote, "There is no traceable order from Berlin for the so-called "Holocaust", but Jews were killed by the million anyway."

The common mechanism seems to have been that, "In the absence of orders, the Nazis on the ground tended to try to "work topwards the Fuhrer". They read the regime's mood music, tried to interpret the Fuhrer's will from it and acted accordingly. I would suggest that the regime was interested in results, not process, and was not too concerned how it was achieved, provided it looked legitimate and could be spun as such."

You ask for a source for the last of my quotations that you kindly put up. ("In Austria there was very probably no need to rig the Anschluss plebiscite at all, if all that was require was a simple majority to legitimize the process, yet the Nazis did just that both before and during voting. So I would not be overconfident that immediately afterwards, during the count, they were all of a sudden gripped by moral rectitiude.") I am not sure which bit you find controversial, but may I recommend re-reading the "Why didn't Hitler advocate Austrian nationalist ideas?" thread on AHF to refresh your memory as to sources, some of which you provided!?

Cheers,

Sid.

User avatar
Lamarck
Member
Posts: 177
Joined: 25 Oct 2017, 18:02
Location: UK

Re: Why didn't Hitler advocate Austrian nationalist ideas?

#323

Post by Lamarck » 17 May 2018, 23:10

I don't think anyone is saying that no amount of vote rigging occurred. However, there was no need for any serious amount of vote rigging and there is no evidence to support that the vote rigging that occurred (how much exactly is unknown) was necessary to provide a clear majority when this was what most Austrians wanted.

Clearly the use of 'overwhelming' when it comes to the Austrians support for the Anschluss is simply something that we will have to agree to disagree about since it is our different judgments that is causing the dispute.

Sid Guttridge
Member
Posts: 10158
Joined: 12 Jun 2008, 12:19

Re: Why didn't Hitler advocate Austrian nationalist ideas?

#324

Post by Sid Guttridge » 18 May 2018, 13:49

Ho Lamarck,

The simple fact is that we just don't know with any precision what the underlying state of Austrian public opinion was in early 1938 beyond that it is plausible that a clear majority probably favoured Anschluss, all other things being equal. How big this "clear majority" was is unknown, so to claim that it was "overwhelming" requires more evidence than is available. And, I would suggest, it is unreasonable to state as a fact anything that goes beyond the available evidence.

Cheers,

Sid.

Sid Guttridge
Member
Posts: 10158
Joined: 12 Jun 2008, 12:19

Re: Why didn't Hitler advocate Austrian nationalist ideas?

#325

Post by Sid Guttridge » 19 May 2018, 19:11

Hi Guys,

I have found the following from Diary of a Man in Despair by Reck-Malleczewen, p.76:

"I can now prove that the plebiscite to legitimize Hitler's takeover of Austria was falsified in the crudest possible way. Together with the other four adults of my house, I naturally voted "No". In addition, I know of at least twenty other reliable people in the town who did the same. Nevertheless, according to the official results, the town unaninously and without a single dissenting voice "approved the actions of the Fuhrer".

Cheers,

Sid.

ljadw
Member
Posts: 15584
Joined: 13 Jul 2009, 18:50

Re: Why didn't Hitler advocate Austrian nationalist ideas?

#326

Post by ljadw » 19 May 2018, 20:51

And what city was this ?

Besides: what the man said is nonsense : how could he be sure of how the other 24 people in his town were voting ? People are very privy about their election intentions .

I know some one who was candidate for the local elections and who voted for an other list , and I know the reason .

User avatar
Lamarck
Member
Posts: 177
Joined: 25 Oct 2017, 18:02
Location: UK

Re: Why didn't Hitler advocate Austrian nationalist ideas?

#327

Post by Lamarck » 20 May 2018, 11:09

Sid Guttridge wrote:Ho Lamarck,

The simple fact is that we just don't know with any precision what the underlying state of Austrian public opinion was in early 1938 beyond that it is plausible that a clear majority probably favoured Anschluss, all other things being equal. How big this "clear majority" was is unknown, so to claim that it was "overwhelming" requires more evidence than is available. And, I would suggest, it is unreasonable to state as a fact anything that goes beyond the available evidence.

Cheers,

Sid.
If you take your time to read through the thread then you will find that although an unambiguous percentage is available, judging from the sources and evidence available, a substantial majority of the Austrians supported the Anschluss and would have done so without Nazi propaganda.

I'm not prepared to waste my time debating the use of 'overwhelming' because that has been thoroughly discussed to the point of ad nauseam. We shall disagree to agree.
Sid Guttridge wrote:Hi Guys,

I have found the following from Diary of a Man in Despair by Reck-Malleczewen, p.76:

"I can now prove that the plebiscite to legitimize Hitler's takeover of Austria was falsified in the crudest possible way. Together with the other four adults of my house, I naturally voted "No". In addition, I know of at least twenty other reliable people in the town who did the same. Nevertheless, according to the official results, the town unaninously and without a single dissenting voice "approved the actions of the Fuhrer".

Cheers,

Sid.
You have repeatedly accused me of cherry-picking sources to support the notion that an overwhelming majority of Austrians supported the Anschluss throughout this thread when in fact that is all you have done over and over again. The only "sources" you have used have been from openly anti-Nazis.

What you have posted is actually a clear case of cherry-picking, you are quoting from a person that was openly hostile to Hitler and the Nazis and seem to believe it without any sort of questioning.

Which town? How did he know that for certain that those people voted "No"? What someone says and what someone does are two different things.

Sid Guttridge
Member
Posts: 10158
Joined: 12 Jun 2008, 12:19

Re: Why didn't Hitler advocate Austrian nationalist ideas?

#328

Post by Sid Guttridge » 21 May 2018, 14:18

Hi ljadw,

I don't know the city - actually he writes "town".

There seems no good reason why he shouldn't have been aware of 20 other people who claimed to have voted "No" as he is likely to have been acquainted with like minded individuals.

Furthermore, you contradict yourself as to the likelihood of him having known how other like-minded people voted in writing from your own experience, "I know some one who was candidate for the local elections and who voted for an other list , and I know the reason"!!!!! If you know how somebody who was trying to deceive you actually voted, why shouldn't he know people who were not trying to deceive him?

Besides, is it likely that 100% of any town voted for any proposition?

Cheers,

Sid.

ljadw
Member
Posts: 15584
Joined: 13 Jul 2009, 18:50

Re: Why didn't Hitler advocate Austrian nationalist ideas?

#329

Post by ljadw » 21 May 2018, 17:04

1) Because in 1938 in Austria people were not telling to other people for whom they were voting :thus I don't believe that 20 people told someone for whom they had voted .

2 ) It is perfectly possible that in a small Austrian town every one had voted for the Anschluss,even anti-nazis .The Anschluss was already a fact and people have a tendency to vote for the winner . In 1921 a Anschluss referendum in Hapsburg faithful had resulted in a majority of 98,77 %:145302 Yes against 1805 No .

3) My example was that someone who publicly defended party A could vote for party B .Thus it is possible that in a small town the leader of the local socialists would have voted for the Anschluss ,if Schuschnigg or Hitler had not put him in prison .

4) Last year a lot of Labour voters voted for Brexit but did not support the UKIP, it was also possible to vote for the Anschluss while remaining hostile to the NSDAP .

5 ) And ,there are the opportunists and the discontented : a lot of nazi voters and even nazi officials were people who in the past had voted for /had been officials of other ,anti Nazi parties . I know some one who was town councillor for party X ,but who, for certain reasons,was no longer selected by the party bosses, and who joined party B and was largely elected town councillor for this party.
a few months before D Day, Petain visited Paris and was welcome by thousands of people . After the liberation of Paris, De Gaulle visited the city and was also welcome by thousands of people; in many cases the same .

ljadw
Member
Posts: 15584
Joined: 13 Jul 2009, 18:50

Re: Why didn't Hitler advocate Austrian nationalist ideas?

#330

Post by ljadw » 21 May 2018, 17:11

Lamarck wrote:
Sid Guttridge wrote:Ho Lamarck,

The simple fact is that we just don't know with any precision what the underlying state of Austrian public opinion was in early 1938 beyond that it is plausible that a clear majority probably favoured Anschluss, all other things being equal. How big this "clear majority" was is unknown, so to claim that it was "overwhelming" requires more evidence than is available. And, I would suggest, it is unreasonable to state as a fact anything that goes beyond the available evidence.

Cheers,

Sid.
If you take your time to read through the thread then you will find that although an unambiguous percentage is available, judging from the sources and evidence available, a substantial majority of the Austrians supported the Anschluss and would have done so without Nazi propaganda.

I'm not prepared to waste my time debating the use of 'overwhelming' because that has been thoroughly discussed to the point of ad nauseam. We shall disagree to agree.
Sid Guttridge wrote:Hi Guys,

I have found the following from Diary of a Man in Despair by Reck-Malleczewen, p.76:

"I can now prove that the plebiscite to legitimize Hitler's takeover of Austria was falsified in the crudest possible way. Together with the other four adults of my house, I naturally voted "No". In addition, I know of at least twenty other reliable people in the town who did the same. Nevertheless, according to the official results, the town unaninously and without a single dissenting voice "approved the actions of the Fuhrer".

Cheers,

Sid.
You have repeatedly accused me of cherry-picking sources to support the notion that an overwhelming majority of Austrians supported the Anschluss throughout this thread when in fact that is all you have done over and over again. The only "sources" you have used have been from openly anti-Nazis.

What you have posted is actually a clear case of cherry-picking, you are quoting from a person that was openly hostile to Hitler and the Nazis and seem to believe it without any sort of questioning.

Which town? How did he know that for certain that those people voted "No"? What someone says and what someone does are two different things.
And, the author quoted by Sid, was a German , not an Austrian ,while the situation in Austria was different .

Post Reply

Return to “Propaganda, Culture & Architecture”