Prussia and the World Wars

You are right.

 

back to topic

i dont think prussia can be held responsible for ww2, most of the head nazis hitler goebbles himmler etc were not prussians nor were many of the general staff.

its a pity really that prussia was wiped away after 1945 and held accountable for what happened.

its demise and destruction was a crime in itself, forgotten because it was perpetrated by the victorious powers.

 

Well, how happy could we have been about the prolonged existence of a purely militaristic state? You are right about the head Nazis not being Prussians in mindset or origins, but some of the 'second-line' nazis and high Army officials certainly were...

OK, just to make it clear, I wasn't trying to establish that Prussia was in the long run responsible for WW2. I don't think it was, since the actual state of Prussia was taken into the German empire back in 1871 and after that Germany wasn't bearly as Prussian as it had been in the 18th century. I was just wondering about your opinion.

 

after 1918 it is debatetable whether prussia was a purely militaristic state, or that it ever was.

my point was that no country (dont forget prior to 1871 Prussia was an independant country) deserves to wiped away as it was. Prussia was very much a state within a state much like england in the Uk.

its people were highly cultured and educated.

none seems to recognise what happened to the area and its people after the end of the war.

I just think that Prussia gets a bad press and there is no one to defend them, that all.

 

Well, no, but after 1918 the damage was already done, and WW2 was waiting in the wings.
Plus the whole idea of 'Prussian' being a high-ranking general, especially a rather militaristic & war-like one was a stereotype imbedded in the German nation by then.

Which war?
After WW1 - not too much, except for the Polish corridor.
After WW2 - it is now Poland. And much of what was Poland is now the USSR (now Ukraine, of course). However, speaking historically, much of that area was once Poland. Although if you go down that route then all of us here except Skua, Christian & jock are Italian...

 

Huh ???

First off why are you mentioning "Prussia" as a High-ranking general.. :-?

And secondly why are you calling Christian and Skua italian's, when Christian is Danish and Skua is Norwegian... :-?

 

Sorry for causing confusion.

The stereotype is that high-ranking officers in Germany were all Prussians, complete with ramrod-straight back & monocle.

No, I'm saying that they are not Italian! Most of the rest of us live in the area that was once the Roman Empire, so if we follow my point:
"speaking historically, much of that area was once Poland" to it's logical conclusion, then I am a citizen of Rome...
However, I can now think of a lot more forum members whose present location was outside the Roman Empire - yourself, Notmi, Moonchild, etc. (no, I'm not including Americans, unless they are of a non-western European background! ). They were just an example.

 

Okay, i understand it now i also missread the part with Christian and Skua, i missed the "Not" part..

KBO

 

Hey, I live on the north side of the Old Rhine! That's beyond Lugdunum Batavorum!

 

historically speakin the areas u speak of apart from the polish corridor hadnt been polish for nearly a thousand years, these areas had been sttled by the germans between 995 -1200, so they wernt recent acquisitions. always part of the holy roman empire and german confedration etc.

 

Settled by the Germans... I think "violently conquered by the Teutonic Order in the name of Christendom" is a more accurate description. This is the origin of Prussia; a duchy built on a militaristic order of monks.

 

thats is incorrect the teutonic nights conquered what was east prussia lithuania latvia estonia after the period im talking about.

the areas of pomerania and silesia were conquered by various holy roman emperors b4 the teutonic nights and settled by germanic peoples up to the year 1225.

anyhow all areas of conquest and settlement were won by violence in those times, that just the way it happened, whether it was germans english french russian swedes etc etc etc.

all countries expanded by conquest u cant just single out prussia, and say that was what it existed for?

 

Yes, but that's the area where Prussia eventually emerged. It took centuries for the electors of Brandenburg-Prussia to get their hands on Pomerania in order to connect the two largest pieces of their country. When I speak of Prussia I speak fundamentally of East Prussia and to a lesser extent any areas to the west of it.

Naturally. However, not all countries were founded on a militarstic chivalric order; usually such an order was installed for local government later. In the case of Prussia such a background definitel was a source of militarism.

 

Is that your school project or something?

Anyway, the European situation at the beginning of the 20th century was in some ways remniscent of the world situation 50 years down the road. You might as well ask who was responsible for the Cold War. Two power blocs are, by nature, never friendly to one another. You cannot blame one for being hostile to the other, since both sides will want to retain their status as dominant power and in so doing come into conflict. Similarly, Prussia, with her rapidly developing economy and powerful military, created a new power bloc in Central Europe. Fear of the new and the powerful is a political reflex. Having already humiliated France in 1870 (Which, not too long ago, possessed one of history's most formidable armies) and become Britain's No.1 competitor in the economic sector, allying the rest of Europe against this new Teutonic threat was the logical thing to do.

Tensions, then, become inevitable. National pride is threatened. Patriotism flourishes. And its these highly strained relations (which were the result of Prussia's threatening, albeit peaceful, national growth) that were to lead to 5 years of hell for all of Europe. Then came the Treaty of Versailles, which could have settled the Prussian problem once and for all. But, sadly, it takes more than 1 war to change the war-tarnished mindset of politicians and generals. So eventually all Versailles did was to put Germany out of action for another 20 years while creating a climate admirably suited to the rise of warmongering extremists.

World War 1 were the fault of politicans from all over Europe, flawed ideas about the length and severity of modern warfare, and the persistent notion that national pride is worth the lives of millions upon millions of young soldiers. World War 2 is the result of a treaty signed by revenge-minded politicians with a lack of imagination. Prussia may have started it all, but economic and military development in the name of national growth can hardly be regarded as something to be ashamed of.

 

And I live in America, where I'm fairly certain the Romans never set foot.

 

But historically, your ancestors were not in America when the Romans had their Empire...
(I assume)

 

Primarily French, Spanish, Italian and English.

 

What, the Romans or the Americans? If you are talking about the latter, you may have missed two important ethnic groups: the Irish and the Germans, especially the latter. But indeed these weren't part of the Roman empire...

Where are your family's roots, Corp?

 

I think that was GP's point...

 

The Irish have a lot of Black haired, ovlie skinned people. this is a throwback from the spanish armada as many ships were wrecked on the coast of Ireland, hence the Irish have a lot of Spanish blood in them.

But yes the two main groups that foundered America are British/English and Spanish.