In article <SIMON.89Nov25133...@ram.UUCP> si...@ram.UUCP (Simon Leinen) writes:
(triple quotes written by myself) : >>My opinion is this: If we (all Germans) want it, let's do it. I : >>get angry ... :No, sorry, not ``all Germans'' want it. [...] I know that. I said "if", and I mean "if". Maybe you should re-read my article to get the point I was making. -- \\ . Martin P Ibert, Westendallee 100 d, 1000 Berlin 19, West Germany // || |\ /| E-mail mart...@netmbx.UUCP ...!uunet!unido!tmpmbx!netmbx!martini || || | | | ---------------------------------------------------------------- || // Voelker der Welt, schaut auf diese Stadt! \\
In article <2...@iis.UUCP> hei...@iis.ethz.ch (Gernot Heiser) writes:
>There is much less nationalism in Germany than in most other European >countries.
This isn't a flame, but isn't the above statement simply an unsupported opinion? What kind of data do you have on the relative levels of nationalism in Europe?
Peace, Mike -- Michael D. Lyons / Nixdorf Computer AG / phone: +49 911 6415 609 Donaustrasse 36 :: D-8500 Nuernberg 60 :: Federal Republic of Germany EUNET: m...@nixba.uucp NERV: lyons.nue OTHERWISE: ...unido!nixba!mike I'd change the world for the better...if I could get my hands on the source code
In article <3...@netmbx.UUCP> mart...@netmbx.UUCP (Martin Ibert) writes:
>Hey, what is all that crap about? There are about 80 million Germans. They are >ONE (1) people and if they choose so, have the internationally acknowledged >right to live in ONE (1) state.
this is a bit, shall we say, simplistic. Germany has been incredibly federated for the entirety of its existence, which makes it difficult (for me anyway :-) to reliably pin down what actually constitutes the "German People." What is the ratio of the time during which we can speak of there being a German *state* to that of the existence of a German *people* ?
>Yes, I know that does not include the US. But shall we go on being intimidated >by that hamburger-munching bunch of arrogant s*ckers?
hmmm...my what an interesting (and unbigoted) political point you have there.
Peace, Mike -- Michael D. Lyons / Nixdorf Computer AG / phone: +49 911 6415 609 Donaustrasse 36 :: D-8500 Nuernberg 60 :: Federal Republic of Germany EUNET: m...@nixba.uucp NERV: lyons.nue OTHERWISE: ...unido!nixba!mike I'd change the world for the better...if I could get my hands on the source code
In article <3...@netmbx.UUCP> sa...@netmbx.UUCP (Erhard Sanio) writes: >our neighbours - in the East as well as in the West. Don't forget that >- at least theoretically - a reunited Germany might not only be governed >by well-behaving people but by, say a chancellor Waigel, vice-chancellor >Schoenhuber and foreign Minister Czaja. Actually, at least we in West >Berlin are protected against such a nightmare - or even a worse one. >So are our neigbours (more or less). At least the Poles have a neigbou-
As an German expat here in Singapore I have only had a chance to look at the whole "reunification"-issue from far away. But I strongly believe, that many people over there in Europe are rushing the topic too much. It will only stir bad feelings in many people in countries like France,GB,ISRAEL,Poland etc if the discussion really goes into the direction of a reunification of Germany as one sovereign country. Besides, I think with all the changes proposed for Western Europe (EEC), a united Germany that might emerge even stronger in some years will only be an economical threat to the other EEC-members, who now already are far behind. Agreed, it will take quite some time for the Eastern part of a (possibly) united Germany to get economically as strong as the western part already is. But then it will be even unfair to the East Germans if big companies take the chance to "develop" east Germany and on the side earn the big bucks, because they have the power. Before any steps in this direction can be taken, I think that on both side people have to bgin to think about the implications of a united Germany and its economy. This includes discussions about wages (at the moment those in East Germany are rather low, so what. Keep them that low to provide cheap work for the western companies or rise wages and prices in East Germany to conform with the West standard?? I think all this needs VERY MUCH TIME to sort out properly.)
And I too see a danger emerging from political circles of people like Schoenhuber. They only think of their nation (whatever they understand that is), and not of a realyy peaceful und UNDERSTANDING together of the whole of Europe and the WORLD. Talking now of a Germany reunified in the borders of '37 will only make the process more difficult if not impossible for all parties concerned, as well as it will help to bring all the bad feeling back which other nations had about Germany before '45. I only hope that a united Germany will prove to be a peaceful country that is governed and inhabited by people who wish to live in peace with their neigh- bours and the rest of the world. I hope some of the Germans could begin to take on an attitude that lets other people live their lives and who don't want to impress their opinions on other states. I certainly think, that a government led by people like Schoenhuber (be it in West Germany or in a united Germany) will prove to be a menace to others. Then we might see '33-45 again.
>>There is much less nationalism in Germany than in most other European >>countries.
>This isn't a flame, but isn't the above statement simply an unsupported >opinion? What kind of data do you have on the relative levels of nationalism >in Europe?
I haven't noticed many (if any) other submissions that come with supporting data, surely the point of this group is for people to voice their _opinions_ in the hope of creating lively debate.
So please give your opinion, should it be contradictory then all the better for the debate, but don't be so immediately dismissive of a statement that was probably based on the feelings one can get from living and working in more than one country.
In article <1...@sequent.cs.qmc.ac.uk> m...@cs.qmc.ac.uk (Matthew Huntbach) writes: >>In article <3...@netmbx.UUCP> mart...@netmbx.UUCP (Martin Ibert) writes: >>>We should leave the "German" territory east of the Oder-Neisse border (Poland's >>>present western border) well alone. The Poles should keep that forever. >>agreed >But Russia still keeps the bits of Poland it stole after >collaborating with Hitler?
Look, Matt, that is the kind of debate we don't need at all in this situation. First, the Russians stole back in 1939 what was stolen by Poland in 1921. West Ukraine was not original Polish territory, as I remember. Second, I regard it nonsense to discuss about revising borders, Wales to the Celts, North America to the Red Indians and Germany for the Neandertal humans.
Whether or not particular borderlines are the best, they exist - and it would be foolish, if not suicide to touch them.
In article <3...@mirsa.inria.fr> huit...@jerry.inria.fr (Christian Huitema) writes: >In article <3...@netmbx.UUCP>, sa...@netmbx.UUCP (Erhard Sanio) writes: >> ..... >> Anyway, I believe that those nations who sacrificed 50 million lives >> in defense of their sovereignty and freedom in WWII have a legal right >> to interefere into changes of the continental equilibre.
>I have seen this figure of 50 millions lives quoted several times in the >debate, and am somewhat surprised by it. Actually, I have the impression >that it includes German deaths as well, my memory recalling me of >something like 25M deaths in the USSR, almost the same in Germany, and >much less in the other countries. The number of French deaths in WW-I, >for one thing, was about three times larger than that of WW-II.
Sorry, but please recall the figures. German losses in WWII were below 8 mio (fucking lot), as far as I know (This includes losses by evacuation & expulsion of Germans from Eastern countries at the end of war). Included the losses by non military genocidal actions of the Nazis (6 mio Jews, about 3 mio others) you can easily see that the figure isn't exaggerated at all. Even if it were, I merely hate those stinky retailers arguments about some 100,000 more or less killed. Does that change anything? Even though French had less fatalities than in WWI, they suffered from Nazi bestiality for more than 4 years.
>Beside, the assertion that the French are globally opposed to German >reunification is contradicted by both opinion polls, which show about >the same kind of split opinions as the German polls although not for the >same reasons, and by the official statements of the French government, >e.g. the very formal statement of M. Mitterand during a joint press >conference with M. Kohl: that Germans are one people, that they deserve >the right to let state and nation boundaries coincidate, but that one >should indeed ask their opinion to the East-Germans too. The add-on is >that the natural harbour for reunification is the European community, >and that one should avoid to start a war with Russia on that subject...
First, Mr. Mitterand is a wizard of diplomacy and politeness - intelligent (and arrogant) as he might be, he never showed Mr. Kohl what he thought about him, he simply let him act out his intellectual qualities (I always considered - and admired - him a little devilish in those situations). Second, I didn't assert at all the French to be particularly concerned about "re"uni- fication. I don't believe most people in Europe see a problem, just now.
But I believe they should - and there are good reasons to be concerned. And, to be honest, personally I a m concerned about the outlook of a fourth Reich. The Germania has already caused some attacks against our immigrated compatriots. Nationalist feelings may increase. Further on, I like the special status of West Berlin, which makes it a rather safe place against any right-wing coup - constitutionally legal or not. Surely, the function of that city will change (and is about to do so) - it can be a gateway and communication point to changing Eastern Europe. I would apreciate that rather than a new Reichshauptstadt.
In <8...@athen.sinix.UUCP> e...@athen.UUCP (Dr. Sanio) writes:
>In <1...@sequent.cs.qmc.ac.uk> m...@cs.qmc.ac.uk (Matthew Huntbach) writes: >>>In <3...@netmbx.UUCP> mart...@netmbx.UUCP (Martin Ibert) writes: >>>> We should leave the "German" territory east of the Oder-Neisse border >>>> (Poland's present western border) well alone. The Poles should keep that >>>> forever. >>> agreed >> But Russia still keeps the bits of Poland it stole after >> collaborating with Hitler?
> Look, Matt, that is the kind of debate we don't need at all in this situation > First, the Russians stole back in 1939 what was stolen by Poland in 1921. > West Ukraine was not original Polish territory, as I remember. > Second, I regard it nonsense to discuss about revising borders, Wales to the > Celts, North America to the Red Indians and Germany for the Neandertal humans
Northern Ireland to the Irish??!
You can't just say "we don't need [debate]" or "I regard it nonsense to discuss". There's a picture in one of our newspapers today showing East German nationalists demonstrating, one carrying the German Tricolour with the outline of the borders of the old Germany painted on it (East, West, and parts of Poland) and the slogan "Germany, My Fatherland". The fact is that it is a live issue, therefore it must be debated.
> Whether or not particular borderlines are the best, they exist - and it would > be foolish, if not suicide to touch them.
Absolutely!! However, the unspoken (amongst polite Europeans) fear is that of a strong new Germany, united on a tide of new Nationalism and looking once again beyond it's (present) borders.
As we're unable to stop reunification in the long run, we must trust that the democratisation imposed upon West Germany after the last War has done it's job and will now be able to hold back the more extream nationalist elements, which occur in all countries, not just Germany.
|\\\X\\|\ | Ian Macey Bath, England. (ma...@praxis.co.uk) |\\X\\\|\\ | ---------------------------------------------------------------- |\X\\\\|\\\| " the solution to a problem changes the problem "
I seem to remember hearing that Roman Polanski once said that the only reason why there were so many Jews in Germany in the 20s/30s was that the other European countries hated them, and the Germans were actually comparatively friendly to them. (Up to 33, anyway)
in article: <1...@castle.ed.ac.uk> ai...@castle.ed.ac.uk (Nicolai A. Czempin) writes:
>I seem to remember hearing that Roman Polanski once said that the only >reason why there were so many Jews in Germany in the 20s/30s was that the >other European countries hated them, and the Germans were actually >comparatively friendly to them. (Up to 33, anyway) >-- >Nicolai Czempin
If this is true, is this, because the Germans (we) had to tolerate allready katholics and (even worse) the reformed church :-) .(As Lutherians of course)
What I mean is: It seems, that Germans don't care much for foreigners or Jews. Even the [IYFEG]-jokes are about other landers. The unification of germany seems to me more natural into North- and South-Germany. North-Germany has same tradition with the Hanse-traderouts, with protestan- tic religion and good contact to the Skandinavian countries and England. The South has better contact with Italy, France and landbased tradingroutes.
Maybe only an ethical group different(?) to *all* Germans (like the Jews) as an "enemy to all" could unify *all* Germans? (No thanks!)
At least, the jewish inhabitants of Colonia have(had?) a tradition rooting back to roman empire.
greetings Micha -- ------ now with improved, biodynamic .signature -------------------- ! Nickname: michel UUCP: schwuc...@uniol.UUCP ! ! Realname: Michael Schwuchow ! ! Position: Oldenburg, FRG EARN: 122685@DOLUNI1 ! ------Lieber ein Universaldilettant, als ein Fachidiot--------------
In article <1...@castle.ed.ac.uk> ai...@castle.ed.ac.uk (Nicolai A. Czempin) writes:
>I seem to remember hearing that Roman Polanski once said that the only >reason why there were so many Jews in Germany in the 20s/30s was that the >other European countries hated them, and the Germans were actually >comparatively friendly to them. (Up to 33, anyway)
?? The number of Jews in Germany before the Holocaust was comparatively small, I think about half a million. Compared, that is, to the Jewish community of Eastern Europe.
