Who Started WW2? Treaty of Versailles Series, Who Started WW2? Weimar Series
The two major sources for this article are Who Started WW2? by Udo Walendy (pages 79–91) and 1939 – The War That Had Many Fathers, by Gerd Schultze-Rhonhof (pages 119–152).
While reading part one you may have been thinking “where is all that stuff about lies about Hitler being dispelled?” I’m glad you asked—we’ll get to that as I add context to the rest of The Holocaust Explained lesson on the Anschluss:
Anschluss refers to the annexation of Austria in 1938. There was growing support in Austria for the Nazis from 1933. The country had a (non-Nazi) semi-fascist government from around this time. In 1934, the Nazis assassinated the Austrian chancellor Engelbert Dollfuss in the hope of establishing a Nazi regime. The coup failed and Kurt von Schuschnigg replaced Dollfuss as chancellor. However, his ring-wing regime was one full of political factions, and its success rested on support from fascist Italy.
From 1938, as Italy grew closer to Nazi Germany, Austria became increasingly isolated and vulnerable to German takeover. The Nazis were keen to expand their territory, and support for the Nazis and a union with Germany among the Austrian people was high.
The German Army marched into Austria on the 12 March 1938, with little to no opposition from the population or any other foreign powers.
On the 13 March 1938, Austria was incorporated into the Greater German Reich. The result of a retrospective plebiscite held by the Nazis indicated that 99% of Austrian nationals supported the move. Despite this, as with previous plebiscites, those who voted were subject to a large amount of pressure from the Nazis to vote this way. As such, the result should be treated with caution. (My emphasis added to show what has not been covered.)
As you can see, there is a big jump from when “Nazis assassinated” Dollfuss in 1934 and the German army marching into Austria in 1938 (see picture below of what that looked like). They don’t even mention the new dictator, Kurt Schuschnigg. What kind of woefully incomplete lesson is this?
In 1936, under the gentle pressure of Italy, there was an attempt at a rapprochement between Germany and Austria. Schuschnigg and the German Special Envoy to Austria, Franz von Papen, sign a German-Austrian Agreement on Normalization and Friendly Relations. This meant that Germany recognized the “full sovereignty of the Federal State of Austria,” and Austria recognized itself as a German state.
As you can see, Hitler was fighting for the will of the people. He wanted what was best for both Germany and Austria. This goes against the notion that Hitler was power hungry tyrant.
Despite the agreement, Schuschnigg really wanted to have a sovereign Austria in the Habsburg tradition. Thus he did not honor the agreement of 1936. He went so far as to punish those that call for an Anschluss. There are 264 sample cases of legal violations in the persecution of such people. These cases include (but are not limited to) imprisonment without trial, prison and fines without proof of guilt, prison without the existence of a crime, asset confiscation, dismissal of public officials for “wrong think,” and such.
Just going to drop this article from 1934 where a Chief Rabbi expresses his full confidence in Schuschnigg. The May 1934 Austrian constitution “formally replaced the constitution by a new basic law defining Austria as an authoritarian corporate state.” This made the Anschluss nearly impossible to achieve if Schuschnigg didn’t want it. Which he didn’t.
Under Schuschnigg’s rule Austria did not prosper, yet Germany continued to improve economically. This caused the citizens of Austria, who were temporarily put off by the “Nazi assassination” of Dollfuss, to find the Anschluss attractive again. The workers especially put their economic hopes in a unification.
Because Schuschnigg was aware of his political isolation and his recognition that broader circles of the population desire Anschluss, he asked von Papen to arrange a meeting with Hitler.
This meeting took place on February 12th, 1938. At this meeting Hitler presented Schuschnigg with “a list of German proposals for a final solution to the Austrian question.” The main demands included obligation for both governments to consult each other on foreign policy, political freedom for the Austrian National Socialist Party, amnesty for political prisoners, restoration of the freedom of the press (yes, that’s right), cooperation of their armed forces, assimilation of their economic systems, and assurance from the German Reich that party agencies will not meddle in Austrian relationships.
After some tough negotiations, Schuschnigg signs the agreement and grudgingly began to comply; however, he had a plan to defy the pact.
I realize that I promised an exciting conclusion at the end of part one, but I decided that the next part of the story needs its own article. Click here to read it!
Another great article GM! Since gab sold out, consider getting on telegram. Lots of frens-ly people and tons of good information historical and current like one might might on a -chan.
Keep up the good work! Hope you see you there some day.
Thankss! I am actually on Telegram. https://t.me/holocaustclaims
and Twitter, https://twitter.com/FanoftheEraGuy
>Since gab sold out
Gab didn’t ‘sell out’ — Torba made a short video explaining the changes and the reasons behind them — it is a matter of survival for the platform, financial survival — hosting fees alone for a site like Gab are a non-trivial monthly expense — and Gab does not attract advertisers like other platforms (that’s because Torba did not ‘sell out’, and there is still a lot of content on the site that if it were on Twitter/X would be called ‘hate’) — have you ever contributed money to Gab? — e.g. buy a pro membership — to offset the monthly hosting (and other) costs — if not, you may want to consider keeping your mouth shut.
Full disclosure: I am not on Gab, and have never been a huge fan of the platform — but I appreciate Torba and what he is trying to do, and understood the reasons he gave for taking the actions he took — also that he has *never* caved and censored content, even though he regularly gets letters from bureaucrats in Europe requesting that content be deleted, and threatening lawsuits if that isn’t done (unlike Twitter, which has been censoring on behalf of European authorities for years, and still does so under Musk).