Austrian president Fischer has given an interview in which he criticized Austrias post- war declaration of independence in 1955 for portraying the country rather as a victim than as a crucial part of the third Reich..

http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/spages/705000.html

A step forward...

... now the formal head of state also remarked that the allied powers made declaration of independance of Austria does not render the truth, but what was only opportune for the four powers but also very well for the Austrians themselves.

The argument: "But the US, France, UK and even also Russia alltogether made their signature under our view of history" does not count anymore.

The first victims you know
Well its even true, the state of Austria was Hitlers first victims, no to be more exact Dollfuß was the first one, the Austrian dictat.... eh I mean of course "Prime Minister" of Austria back than until Hitler ordered his death and a Nazi assisinated him in the year 1934. But that all does not change the fact that not the Austrians themselves were the first victims, it was only the Austrofascists. IMHO not worth sheding a single tear. (Well at least if you are not a conservative Austrian, you know the Conservative Party has still a portray of Dollfuß in the Chancellors office it currently occupies )

To make it short: The following were the first victims of Hitler:


"We protect Austria - Fatherland's Front"

Well, yes and no. Yes: the Vaterländische Front was in power with Schuschnigg chancelor when the Nazis annexed Austria and ended their rule.
But this is not what was meant with the historical doctrine right after the war (until nowadays!) that Austria was the first victim. It is rather that Hitler deprived Austria of its souverainty and erased Austria from the map, as first souverain country in Europe. This is were this story comes from.

Nobody shed a tear for the semi-fascist Austrian regime, a huge part of the population (escpecially the socialists) did not even support Austrian independance. But nevertheless Austria as a state was the first state victim of German aggression, which was of course used afterwards by the masses of collaborators to hide behind it.

__________________
[IMG]http://electronicintifada.net/artman/uploads/eu_flag2-b_002.jpg[/IMG]

Feb, what was the difference between the state Austria and the Vaterländischen Front back then?

Well Austria was a state and thus a subject to international law whereas the VF was a party organisation which - admittedly - tried to present itself of as the entire nation but those attempts were propaganda and ridiculous. The Vf was far from ever gaining the ideological mass support which was behind Hitler or Mussollini. They had the nazis and the socialists against them and this was from the beginning a very desperate struggle.

I remember a quote from Friedrich Torberg that went like:

"Answering on the question on the political attitude of the people Seipel answered: There are 40% Nazis, 40% socialists and 20% old christian-socials. Then the other one said: But what about the VF? And Seipel answered: That was exactly what I was talking about!!" (from: Die Erben der Tante Jolesch)

__________________
[IMG]http://electronicintifada.net/artman/uploads/eu_flag2-b_002.jpg[/IMG]

Then again I have to ask you, what is the role of the VF in nazi terror which makes Austria a crucial part of the nazi regime? Leading VF politicians like later chancellor Leopold Figl were arrested and tried.

__________________
[IMG]http://electronicintifada.net/artman/uploads/eu_flag2-b_002.jpg[/IMG]

Good quote

Yes I know that they did not have the public support they would have wished for. But by state I meant the not "nation" or "country" I meant "state". The appartus that rules the country. The one, that also was liquidated, the Austrians were not liquidated, well at least most not.

The Christlich Sozialen, the Austro fascists run the state, and they were the victim of the Anschluss. Thats what I wanted to say.

On a journey in Austria, I visited a former Concentration Camp. All of the information there depicted Austria as being "the first victim" of Germany and "occupied" 1938-45. With me on the visit were people from other countries, and the Germans were especially upset at this view of history. They told some of the others of us that Germany had made up with its guilt from the Nazi years, but this was proof that the Austrians had not.

In a way, Austria is a historical anomaly, considering that most European states are nation states. It exist as a sovereign state separate from Germany, because it was the lands of the strong House of Habsburg-Lothringen. Now it isn't any longer, the raison d'etre for the sovereign state of Austria disappeared in 1918. There were not few Austrians who wanted their state to become part of Germany before 1938. This was even considered an option after WWI, but the Entente did not want Germany to gain any territory.

__________________
[U]President Josiah Bartlet:[/U] Sweden has a 100% literacy rate. 100%! How do they do that?
[U]Leo McGarry:[/U] Maybe they don't and they can't add.

Don't forget Italy.

I don't, but that was not the issue here.

__________________
[U]President Josiah Bartlet:[/U] Sweden has a 100% literacy rate. 100%! How do they do that?
[U]Leo McGarry:[/U] Maybe they don't and they can't add.