Did the German Popluation want Lebensraum

That may be I just don't see how it applies to my point or to the topic at hand for that matter. There was also a bit of diplomacy involved in it as well I believe.

 

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
LWD, the start of the lebensraun call was before the famine year of 1918-19- the Movement was captured & expanded on by the NASDAP. People do not forget starvation, or family deaths.
conversely, the american Treasury lost a huge amount by sitting on 2.589 per bushel wheat that it could have exported to Germany on credit.

 

Indeed one could claim the concept is considerably older than that. There was considerable emigration from Germany in the 19th century essentially for "Lebensraum" although Wiki notes:
Lebensraum - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Which notes that it's a governmental policy rather than an individual one.

But my point of course was that the Nazi's did indeed expand it to something more than a hedge against starvation.

Which again I don't see as relevant to our discussion. A hint repeating the same thing doesn't help explain it anymore the 10th time than it did the first.

 

If youread through the links attached LWD the economics becomes clearer.

 

Not really. Your links concentrate on US farm policy but we are talking about the German quest for "Lebensraum". Furthermore I've pointed out that this was a pre WWI movement and you contineue to talk about US policy post WWI. You have yet to provide much in the way of a link and seemed to trying to avoid doing so.

 

Relax Lwd!
Time for all of us is limited.
there were 'options ' inthe watershed year of 1918- 1919 to supply food to Germany. For instance, the US State Dept could have exported the mountain of subsidised wheat for the fleet at Scapa Flow- before it was scuttled. It was a real asset, tragically wasted.
Instead Germay starved , while world wheat prices soon plummeted.

The conclusion on the German street was that autarky was the only remaining solution. For Autarky you neeeded Lebenstram. A people hardened by deliberate starvation lashed out.

Close to a million German clhildren died form starvation related causes in that cruel year. LWD

 

That may be but it is far from clear how relevant that is to the topic at hand.

That is far from clear. The British had a claim on those ships did they not? Also I'm not sure the US State Department was capable of exports of that size.

There were other solutions do you have any sources that suggest that the "German street" saw it as the only one?

But Germany could potentially have been self sufficient as far as food as well I believe or at least much closer to it as their agricultural sector was not particularly efficient.

 

I was kind of wondering about your number above as it seemed a bit excessive. A quick web search turned up: http://libcom.org/files/blockade Germany_0.pdf Which does indeed make it look so. Do you have a source for the above number? This is especially the case if you take the influenza epidemic into account. See: http://www.volgagermanbrit.us/documents/Influenza_1918_1919.pdf

 

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
At this pont I woudl refer you rto Blockade of Germany - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia which contains numerous sources on the blockade after the armistice. As a brand new board member, I'd rather err on the side of caution in the debates.

 

The wiki site doesn't support your contention of almost 1,000,000 children dieing of starvation or it's effects during the year leading up to the end of the blockade either. If you state numbers you should have a good source for them. Wiki by the way is often considered rather marginal in this regard. I personally view it as a decent starting point and will reference it but am not too surprised if someone sites a better source.

 

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
It provides its sourcing at the bottom of the article. Lwd, no offense, there a number of sites like Axis Histrory forum where the current policy is' long timers thrash Newbies'. Until I know this site better,I'll pass on the challenges.
try http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=587

thanks

VINCENT, C. Paul, The Politics of Hunger: The Allied Blockade of Germany 1915-1919 (Athens OH 1985); (this fantastic book is almost totally unobtainable). Two million Europeans died, mostly in Germany and Austria; the mortality rate was 250% higher than in Great Britain, as a result of the blockage. Vincent makes a direct connection between the illegal blockade and Hitler's rise to power: psychoanalysis shows the later consequences of mistreatment in childhood; the German "hunger generation" of 1915-1920 became the most radical followers of National Socialism. Britain's starvation blockade was a "significant factor in the formation of the Nazi character" (in English in the text).
Starvation blockade of Germany, WWI and II; see also Allied war crimes


Reg

 

Providing a source that doesn't support your numbers and in fact contradicts them is a rather strange way of making your point.

Funny I never experianced that and haven't really seen it happening. What I have seen is people who make statements and can't back them up being given a rough time.

Well that doesn't support your almost 1,000,000 German children dieing of starvation effects in a year either does it? the mortality rate was 250% higher than in Great Britain, as a result of the blockage. Vincent makes a direct connection between the illegal blockade and Hitler's rise to power: psychoanalysis shows the later consequences of mistreatment in childhood; the German "hunger generation" of 1915-1920 became the most radical followers of National Socialism. Britain's starvation blockade was a "significant factor in the formation of the Nazi character" (in English in the text).... [/QUOTE] No one has said it wasn't a factor though and the most that he seems to be claiming is that it is a "significant factor". If you look at the mortaility rates in http://www.volgagermanbrit.us/documents/Influenza_1918_1919.pdf as presented in figure 3 one can also see that the choice of period has considerable impact on the ratio and even in the year in question at least according to figure 2 was somewhat less than the 250% stated. Although clearly the situation was very serious. Oh by the way it looks like it is available on line at least according to: The politics of hunger : the allied blockade of Germany, 1915-1919 (Book, 1985) [WorldCat.org] Amazon has it as well but it's very pricey.

 

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I gave a referneced souce for 1,000,000 & for 2,500,000 & chose the low source.
So what are your figures, LWD?

 

Mate, we try our best to encourage not thrash...we are capable of thrashing but generally at certain times of the year when we get the usual visitors who in a number of ways spout off their ideology....some in an obvious Hitler was my hero and the ss were innocent of all charges...to the lets look at this reasonably...get some on board and then say Hitler was my mate and the SS were the good guys much maligned...We don't tend thouugh to thrash newbies unless they are looking for homework help and even then some of us point them to where they should be looking rather than providing. Scources are ALL on this site. Everyone...no matter how long a member will be asked to prove their scources and in the main will not take offence. Why should we. We are here to share and help. LWD. is known and appreciated for his minutae in detail. And can throw spanners into folks oft repeated assertions when he among others asks for a little proof...Its not a challenge its a pre requisite and the site benefits from his and others vigilance.

 

Agreed. tonight LWD is , perhaps unintentionally- 'arguing the negative eel' - he doens't like ANY evidence I present , but has studiously avoided providing a counter position.

 

• 
  ______________++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
  ONCE AGAIN, read the links through before firing off a comment. You don't have to follow me around the threads with vague negative comments...
  You aren't MAKING any point , LWD. You have spent your last dozen posts followign me around with contradiction.
  
  Use Argument , lwd- not Contradiction...

 

Summer holidays!

 

I'll ask one that Lwd has pointed too already. Why should Great Britain at that time give the German fleet free reign to sail from Scapa to the States so Americans could profit from anything? Now If America was offering to buy the fleet for whatever reason scrap or use or just get it out of the way..why should they then give anything to Germany? I do agree if the German nation was starving then it should have been a merciful thing for all nations to step in at the time to assist, but hoping to get wheat from America via the British giving up the German fleet does not make sense in any way for trade reasons..The British at that time were not a state of the USA even if it looks that way today. We could have put it towards our own debt to the States of course but Britain would not be gifting any nation a fleet to challenge its own at any time in the future...we didn't require the US to provide a Trident with a Union Jack on in 1919.

 

Actually I did you just ignored it. I then proceeded to demonstrate that your argument was rather flawed.