VII.
VII. Thoughts and Considerations during Captivity
War. Now the slogan is raging again: No more war! How nice that sounds. I heard this slogan 20 years ago, just after the First World War. And just 20 years later, we went into the Second World War. That’s how quickly things change. One can only counter these naive peace enthusiasts with what Moltke once wrote to a Swiss ethnologist: “Eternal peace is a dream, and not even a beautiful dream, for war is part of God’s scheme of the world. In war the noblest virtues of man develop courage and renunciation, the sense of duty and abnegation, and all at the risk of his life. Without war the world would be swallowed up in the morass of materialism.”[1] Heraclitus also calls war the father of all things, both positive and negative.[2] And that is exactly how it is. - War creates many evils, but it also eliminates others. It brings back to its senses a human society that through all too long wealth has become cosseted, effete, rotten and boggy. Countless cultures have already perished because of their prosperity, because nobody wanted to work or serve, but only to savour.
The most pious man can’t stay in peace if it doesn’t please his evil neighbour.[3] This applies to the individual and to entire nations. And that is why there will always be wars, because evil is also in the world. Anyone who refuses to recognise this fact is blind. History shows us this every day! But just because you know that war is an unavoidable evil doesn’t make you a supporter of war!
War destroys human lives and property. But the peace we live in today destroys all moral and ethical values. And that is much worse. Human dignity is more valuable than human life.[4] Looking for the cause of the downfall of Athens and Rome in their effeminacy, gluttony and debauch is not wrong, but it is only superficial bourgeois thinking. Athens and Rome fell because they had lost their national dignity and their culture. Because they were no longer prepared to make sacrifices for their dignity and culture and to defend them, if necessary with war and human lives. Jesus’ words ‘He who loves his life will lose it’[5] can also be interpreted to mean that those who value their lives more highly than moral values will perish. A war against immorality and lack of culture is more justified than pacifism, under the guise of which greed for life, licentiousness and other vices flourish. The pacifist thesis that life is the highest good is fundamentally wrong. Otherwise there would be no heroes and saints and no martyrs!
Why is there so much suffering in the world? The Christian does not need to ask himself this question.[6] Suffering is not always punishment. Suffering through no fault of our own is grace. Christ redeemed us through his bloody suffering. Why he chose this path we must leave to his omniscience. We can only believe. Believing (being able to believe) is a grace. Or do we want to presume to recognise or even judge God’s plans with our birdbrains? Anyone who only recognises God as long as they receive good things from HIM and turns their back on HIM as soon as HE imposes trials on them has not grasped the essence of Christianity. Christ’s life was a sacrifice, the sacrifice of a life for others. God has not promised even his faithful on this earth a paradise, but only the carrying of the cross. Anyone who is reluctant to carry their cross and only ever asks: “Why me of all people?” is a bad Christian. If they persecuted me, they will also persecute you.[7] This is our Christian lot. Out of suffering and death new things are born. It is a law of nature. If the seed does not die, it does not bear new fruit.[8] Human life is born in pain. Why is that so? There are many things in the world that are beyond our comprehension.
Our current separation is hard. I’m lying here, trapped and idle. But at home, Carola, if she is still alive, has to carry all the burden and care for the family alone. Poor, dear, brave woman! Your faithfulness is also being put to a hard test too. May the Blessed Mother help you. I remember the words of the captive Gudrun when rumours of her husband’s alleged infidelity were whispered to her: “And if I saw it with my own eyes - my heart does not see it!” What moving greatness, love and loyalty - perhaps there really is such a thing.[9] But the pure idealist usually perishes in this world. You don’t mint coins from pure gold.
I looked behind the scenes of an achiever. That gave my guilelessness another nudge. This kind of career through intrigue, bluffing and manipulation “on the edge of legality” doesn’t suit me. I lack both the ability to recognise such opportunities and the recklessness to carry them out. Nor do I want to, because it contradicts my character and my world view. When I needed to relieve the boredom of camp life with some kind of activity, I did what enriched me inwardly. Others did what brought them practical benefits. While I listened to theological debates, others obtained additional food at a labour detachment outside the camp. I have certainly learnt and done many things in this area out of necessity, but I am always amazed at the ingenuity and cunning of some people. People call them clever, but I can’t stand them. But they get through this world more easily. Those who don’t feel obliged to any God or conscience, who only strive for their own advantage without any sense of justice or responsibility, live more easily. This is why people of faith and conscience are often at a disadvantage. The more valuable people, for whom the disparity between their inner world and the outer world in which they have to live becomes a tragedy, because their purer will and their better insight fail because of the wickedness of this world. The best proof of this is the life of Jesus. It is the poignant tragedy of a pure, divine man who is thrown into this imperfect world. He is killed. A similar fate befalls all true Christians in this world. Their worldview does not allow them to go along with the unscrupulous methods of this world, and therefore they will always be at a disadvantage compared to the children of this world. It is true that economic initiatives are less likely to come from Catholics, that Catholic countries are among the poorest in the world, that the percentage of Catholics in high positions is lower than that of the total population. And one sees the reason for this in the anti-materialist world view.
As far as we Schrödters are concerned, we have never been soldiers of fortune. Everything that we are and have has been achieved through honest, hard work and our own efforts without outside help. With the exception of God’s help. My father achieved it through iron energy and unusually tenacious labour; I myself through tireless diligence and thrift; my brother through determined diligence under the particularly difficult conditions of the post-war period.
I have already experienced twice in my life how transitory money and possessions are. Two lost wars and an inflation deprived our family and the whole nation of all our material possessions. When Carola had to flee the Russians from Cammin in January 1945, she arrived at her sister’s house in Warendorf with a rucksack on her back and a child at each hand. That was all we had left. Only a decent character, a good upbringing and a solid vocational training are permanent and cannot be lost.
I am well aware that every culture also requires a certain material basis; that education and a good upbringing are usually not available without money. Nor do I despise money at all. But I do despise a view that sees the meaning of life solely in pleasure and earning money. These avaricious earners, these selfish money-grubbers are repugnant to me at heart.
The disappearance of the Nazis is not a pity. They tyrannised the German people. They shook the foundations of marriage (“Hegehof”), they broke up families (youth education in camps, incitement to denounce parents), they humiliated the adults in front of the youth (position of power of the HJ leaders), they turned the girls into butches (pack marches), they used pressure and tricks to combat the practice of religion and attendance at church services (personal experience[10]), they insulted and denigrated all culture-bearing strata (nobility, clergy, intelligentsia, bourgeoisie), they hindered a lot of meaningful work through pointless party service (sitting around in pubs, “Sturm premises”), they preached hatred (“Our religion is to hate!”), they forced people to subscribe to Nazi newspapers and join Nazi organisations. They murdered unpopular personalities (Klausener and others). They arrested people arbitrarily. Every little PG (party comrade) claimed police power. They dispensed justice according to party criteria. The people were so intimidated that they dared not speak out.
However, it must be admitted that, at least at the beginning of their rule, the Nazis pursued a number of perfectly reasonable government goals, which then received the honest approval of the people. The way in which the Nazis governed the people was a psychological masterstroke. They knew how to skilfully appeal to the decent character traits of the German people (and their weaknesses!) and mobilise their emotions. What, in contrast, would have provoked disapproval among the people was often concealed. Few knew about the secret mass extermination of the Jews. At most, one could only guess. The virtuosity with which Göbbels manipulated the people is astounding, even though every child was aware of his hair-raising mendacity. If you tell the people a lie often enough, they will eventually believe it. This is particularly easy with the gullible and politically somewhat instinctless German.
People sometimes ask today why the Germans put up with this Nazi regime. Well:
1. Anyone who asks this question obviously doesn’t know the methods of a dictatorship. Those who wanted to overthrow this system simply did not have the opportunity. The power of the state apparatus was omnipresent and overpowering.
2. A large part of the population had not even intended to overthrow ‘’Hitler‘’[11]. They voted for him by an overwhelming majority and - at least in the early years - were in complete agreement with his aims. They were enthusiastic.
And anyone who says that the people were blinded by this pied piper should take a look at the hysterical enthusiasm with which our youth today idolise pop singers or follow religious sect leaders (or pied pipers). Unfortunately, our people are easy to influence.
Unfortunately, I must add one more thing: All the accusations I have levelled against the Nazis above could equally, with slight modifications, be levelled at many of today’s democratic governments - not excluding the two German ones. The difference lies only in the methods: Destruction of marriage and the family, excessive courting of the youth, alignment of women with the male world, weakening of church structures. The role of the “German Christians” of that time is now played by the youth sects. The political seduction of youth at that time has given way to sexual, criminal and drug seduction. Politically unpopular people are not shot today, but they are interrogated by the authorities to such an extent that they commit suicide because they were no longer able to cope with the psychological strain. And psychological terror is commonplace today. Anyone who said something kind about the Jews back then was imprisoned. Anyone who says something unkind against the Jews today is also locked up. What’s the difference? Is that freedom of speech?
Just look at these Antifa/en! Their ideology may be anti-fascist, but their methods are the same, if not worse, as those used by Hitler’s fascism! The same lust for power, tyranny, censorship, brutal repression, the same terror of opinion. Perhaps it is pointless to even say a word about such things.
A large proportion of the people are incomprehensible and lack the capacity for their own judgement. The masses must be guided. A government that allows every greenhorn to interfere with its work certifies its own incompetence. The people must be led. But this leadership must be orientated towards the legitimate interests of the nation and must not degenerate into tyranny. Above all, the leadership must be qualified. The tendency to order, systematise and organise is part of our nature. But statesmanlike thinking and diplomatic skills are not in our nature. The German is not a diplomat. They are hard workers. They are easy to lead and manipulate. But we only produce leaders with statesmanlike qualities of international standing once every century, less often than in other countries. In foreign countries we move like a bull in a china shop, regardless of whether it is a statesman (Ribbentrop in front of the English King![12]), a Nazi bigwig abroad, or German tourists abroad. No wonder we have few friends abroad. Our products are appreciated, but not ourselves. Another bad thing is that we always go from one extreme to the other. When we have a democracy, parliamentary government work usually degenerates into party bickering. The narrow-minded politicians do not think beyond their party interests. The guiding principle of their actions is not the good of the state, but the question: how can I keep the votes for myself and my party? But when the idea of imperial unity really comes to life - as it did under Hitler - it becomes completely exaggerated. We overstretch everything. We turn a party programme into a world view, genetics and race concepts into a religion. Our behaviour towards the Jews is also typical. Jews are not popular in other nations either, and there have even been occasional pogroms. But the Germans turned this aversion into an extermination campaign. This is a typical example of German thoroughness. This thoroughness goes so far that even the colour of the letterboxes is changed when there is a change of government! In the German Empire they were blue, in Weimar they were yellow[13], under the Nazis they were red, today they are yellow again. It’s downright ridiculous.
One of the causes of the unfortunate events in German history runs through it like a common thread: German discord and stubbornness. Even the Romans exploited the individualism of the Germanic tribes and made them fight each other. France later did the same with its Rhine Confederation policy. While France pursued a great power policy as a united nation under centralised leadership and England began to build a world empire, the Germans fell out with egotistical princes’ interests, regionalism and local patriotism. And also today, Germany is again divided into a dozen countries whose governments are dominated by the most diverse interests. This division was more or less forced on us, but it was also accepted because it suited the German character. Poor, stupid Germany! How powerful you could be if the German-speaking peoples were all united! But Schiller is probably right when he advises the Germans in “Xenien”: “Forget, O Germans, your hopes of becoming a nation; Educate yourselves instead more freely - you can - to be human beings”[14] To this I would like to add that the freedom we enjoy today has brought us serious damage because, in typical German fashion, we have once again exaggerated this freedom beyond measure. How many offences and crimes are committed and tolerated here today in the name of freedom or under the guise of freedom! Today’s leading politicians do not seem to realise this. How could they possibly have the skills to do so? No wonder, when you consider that the head of state was a poster painter and the foreign minister a wine merchant. In Weimar, the first man in the state was a master saddler[15], and today it is the illegitimate son of a washerwoman[16]. Of course, brilliant statesmen have often emerged from the most modest social circumstances. But these are exceptions. It can hardly be assumed that the politically untalented German people, of all people, produce such talents on a continuous basis, especially as we have a dozen heads of government and hundreds of ministers running around today. There are only a few political or certain statesmanlike talents among them. Most of our current leaders and “responsible persons” are mediocre or petty upstarts from the trade unions with an disturbingly narrow historical horizon. And even if they have been promoted (by the party!) to the rank of doctor Hon. Causa or professor, they remain without stature or political vision. What is really great about many of them is their eagerness to make a name for themselves, their inflated vanity and the impudence with which they help themselves to the state coffers, i.e. the people’s tax money.
And the people? They grumble, but they put up with everything. A Frenchman once said to me: “The Germans must be led.” He was right, and they are easy to lead - just like with Hitler back then. The masses just don’t have an opinion of their own. Today’s people in particular hardly have the time or leisure to think about the world and about themselves and to form their own judgement. For many people, the press and radio have taken over the formation of opinion. The supposedly progressive people of the 20th century are increasingly manipulated, scheduled, registered and numbered. And the incomprehensible thing is that they don’t even realise it. In fact, business advertising, political agitation, the press and television today work with such sophisticated psychological methods that you have to be an expert to recognise their opinion-making.
The German is incapable of finding a sensible middle way. His relationship with the Jews remains one of the prime examples. Under the Nazis they were exterminated, today they are specially protected by preferential legal provisions. The racial theory is a similar example. The Nazis exaggerated the completely natural differences in nature between the individual races to such an extent that they elevated the Nordic race to the status of master race on the one hand and degraded other peoples to sub-humans on the other. He always creates extremes. Today - again a reaction towards the extreme - left-wing ideology no longer wants to recognise any differences at all and digs out the old stupid theory of the equality of all people. Our belated enlighteners are purposefully spreading this madness among the people: they are promoting the integration of all immigrant foreigners, thereby turning our nation into a mongrel. They say: Give all children the same educational opportunities and they will all be equally clever. They declaim: “A bit of Turkish blood is doing Berliners good!”
Every animal breeder knows that there are good and bad breeds with considerable differences in character. The same applies to human races and to individual people. Only our new Marxist egalitarians, in their ideological stubbornness and stupidity, don’t want to see it. And where the differences in talent between people cannot be overlooked, they claim that they have only arisen due to the better educational opportunities of the propertied class. They fight against everything that stands out above the average. They stand for the spirit of the inferior. Envy is their world view and hatred is the driving force behind their actions. These narrow-breasted “democrats” with their dwarf’s envy, which will not tolerate anything above itself, which jealously fights everything that rises above it, which rejects and declares nonsense everything that it does not understand with its limited intellect. This type is worthless for the development of humanity. To them one could apply the words of Hölderlin: “We don’t ask whether you’re willing... you slaves and barbarians! Nor will we try to change you for the better, for that’s a waste of effort! we just want to see to it you make way for the triumphant march of man.”[17]
The diversity of human beings cannot be denied. People are not all the same. There are decent and characterless, stupid and clever, lazy and industrious. This is how differences in achievement and education and social classes gradually develop. An economic, cultural, an intellectual leadership class with broader horizons and greater knowledge develops. It stands on a higher level. These classes are the pillars of the nation. It is only a small class, because the precious is rare. There are always only a few who lead the masses. Energy is also a quality that allows people to rise to leadership positions. But when energy or intelligence is combined with characterlessness, the leader becomes a seducer. The people always follow the one who is most skilful at fluting. They parrot the slogans that the leaders and the mass media tell them.
Even the simplest manual labourers are necessary. No one will deny them and their profession recognition or disparage their achievements. But the creative forces lie in the spiritual. They have priority because they create the conditions for technology and better living conditions. Intellectual achievements are also more difficult to achieve. That is why intellectual professions should be valued more highly and also better remunerated. They do not have to be scientific jobs. Every manager or leading position in economic life also requires higher qualifications and is therefore one of the supporting forces of a nation. If socialism means justice, then its task is not the equal but the just distribution of the goods of this life. “Do not bury God and nature under the phrase of the equality of all men, but give those who have a higher nature and education and greater abilities more room and means for the creation of higher values and goods. And do not leave to the mob the judgement of what is good and right.” (Who said that?[18])
The prejudices that the parvenus, these half-educated upstarts, bring with them from their milieu also stick with them for the rest of their lives. Prejudices that they have cut their teeth on, that they have grown up with and that they will never get rid of throughout their lives (Napoleon, Hitler and many others).
Sometimes I get angry when I think about the Asian steppe hordes that plundered and devastated our homeland and my home. The Americans, too, have in places acted like rowdies and stolen. But nowhere were entire provinces plundered as completely as the areas occupied by the Soviets. Comrades tell of entire shiploads of furniture, pianos and other items arriving in Libau and Windau from East Prussia. I myself have seen entire factory equipments and machine tools next to the railway tracks in Russia, which had been tipped to the side from the wagons and are now lying next to the tracks and rusting away unnoticed. The fact that entire streets in some cities were systematically looted, that Soviet officers took all the carpets out of the flats, that an Ivan carried a whole bag of stolen wedding rings with him, that people’s gold crowns were ripped out with pincers, is even the less criminal side. After all, it is robbery in violation of international law. Worse are the horrific brutalities, the mass rapes, the suffering of the East German population during their flight in the icy winter.
But alongside the anger, the knowledge of the evil in people and the shortcomings of this world also emerges. And faith in God’s providence. Nothing happens without God’s knowledge and will. The question of why God permits such cruelty to innocent people is wrong. It is equally wrong to claim that there can be no God if something like this can happen. It would be better to ask whether we are not to blame for these punishments ourselves. Have people really always been so good? Perhaps it is the punishment for offending God a thousand times over? We are told often enough in the Bible that innocent people must also suffer for this. Why haven’t we listened to this? Moreover, it still happens every day that innocent people have to suffer because of the crimes of others, without our authorities showing any particular concern for these innocent victims, e.g. the surviving dependants of those murdered, robbed, kidnapped and many others.[19] Why is God accused of behaviour that we ourselves are guilty of every day? - The incessant blasphemies of the Nazis must have evoked a judgement one day. I had already realised this during the war. But all these arguments are too human and too primitive. We do not know God’s thoughts and would not be able to comprehend them.[20]
There are people with whom any relationship becomes downright disastrous. Dealing with bad “friends” has already brought down many. It’s best to keep them at arm’s length, but it often takes moral courage.
How many genocides (Indians of America, [[w:en:Stalinist repressions in Mongolia|Mongols of Siberia], Jews of Europe), how many wars, civil wars, guerrilla and underground struggles, murders and crimes of all kinds have taken place in recent history! Even in the so-called civilised countries of Europe and in our 20th century, which is called the century of progress! And this century of record crime dares to call the Middle Ages dark and condemn the Inquisition!
According to the Leninist view, the only just war is that of the proletariat against the imperialist and capitalist exploiters of humanity.[21] But since all non-communist states are capitalist, every war waged by the Soviet Union - including aggressive wars - against bourgeois and right-wing authoritarian states is just. It’s as simple as that! But this is to be taken quite seriously, because the Russians are just as convinced of their missionary idea of liberating the oppressed peoples of the world as the Americans consider it their mission to stand up for the freedom of the free world.
In the diplomatic arena, too, the Russians assert themselves against their Western counterparts and even against the diplomatically highly adept French with the skilfulness typical of the Asian races. The West makes the mistake of always assuming in its tactics towards the Russians that the Russians think in the same Western categories. But they don’t, which leads to misjudgements and failures. We must finally get away from the naïve idea that the Russians are human beings like us and that we can negotiate and conclude agreements with them. Of course the Russians are human, but not like us. On the contrary, he is radically different. And he only keeps treaties as long as they bring him advantages. (Or did he honour the human rights agreements signed in Helsinki[22]? And many others?) But even when he breaks treaties, he does it in a very subtle way. The West is no match for Russian slyness.
In the officer camp in Windau, thefts from comrades become more frequent. Officers are stealing, lying and assaulting each other. Recently, one of them had to be taken to the sick bay after a brawl. They defraud each other of a slice of bread or a few potatoes, and for a water gruel they abase themselves as lickspittles to the kitchen staff or denunciators to the Russian. Their belly is their god, and they sacrifice their human dignity for it. Churchill’s characterisation of the Germans hits the nail on the head: “...arrogant in victory and without backbone in defeat.”[23] I do not mean to defame the whole officer corps. The majority are still decent, but the incidents are shameful. There are many reasons: The egoism, triggered by hunger; the narrowness threatening intimacy, triggering aggression; the uncouth characters of unqualified officers, etc.
It is also not the case that the opportunism and plebeian behaviour only arose as a result of the captivity situation. These character defects only became more pronounced here. They were already present in the germ, as genetic material, and came to light due to the unfavourable circumstances here. The fact that due to the shortage of officers in the last years of the war, many unfit and unworthy people entered the officer corps is shown by the fact that beginners’ courses in German and arithmetic were set up in the Windau camp (although I do take a positive view of the pursuit of education). What you don’t already have as genetic material can hardly or only with great difficulty be taught. But the thin veneer of education falls off the walls like plaster in crucial situations.
Some say: Necessity knows no law, or: In adversity, one stands alone. Others say: Adversity unites people into a community of need and destiny and welds them together. Both are right. It depends on the disposition of those affected as to whether they unite in adversity or devour each other. Adversity is only the touchstone on which all the false and dishonest shells of human beings break until the true core comes to light.
After the First World War, the Italian Prime Minister wrote in a book,[24] and Lloyd George in a memorandum proved that unjust demands, which the victor imposes on the vanquished in a feeling of triumph, are already the seeds of a new war. They were right. Hitler owed much of his initial success and sympathy among the German people to the fact that he promised to eliminate the humiliating, unjust and economically oppressive provisions of the Versailles Diktat. Which he did. [Gustav Stresemann|Stresemann]] had not succeeded in this in twelve years of negotiations, although he kept making new concessions. With regard to this, Stresemann said one year before his death[25]: “I gave and gave, but you (the Allies) took and took. That was my fault and your crime!”Referenzfehler: Für ein <ref>-Tag fehlt ein schließendes </ref>-Tag.
The following phase of my dreams was about war and battles. They were always victorious. Here, too, I remember a trench battle. We took a Russian trench in an onslaught. I stood up on the edge of the trench and looked down at the Russians in the trench. After occupying the trench, I wanted to take up the pursuit and said: “A victory is only complete when the enemy is completely destroyed!” That’s what I had learnt in tactics lessons.
In the last years of my captivity, I repeatedly dreamed of home and of returning home. Once I saw a 3-storey house in Russian timber construction, but in my mind it was my birthplace in Berlin, which was also 3-storey.
|
Editorial 1938 1939 1940 1941 1942 1943 1944 1945 1946 1947 1948 1949 Epilog Anhang |
|
January February March April May June July August September October November December Eine Art Bilanz Gedankensplitter und Betrachtungen Personen Orte Abkürzungen Stichwort-Index Organigramme Literatur Galerie:Fotos,Karten,Dokumente |
|
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. Erfahrungen i.d.Gefangenschaft Bemerkungen z.russ.Mentalität Träume i.d.Gefangenschaft Personen-Index Namen,Anschriften Personal I.R.477 1940–44 Übersichtskarte (Orte,Wege) Orts-Index Vormarsch-Weg Codenamen der Operationen im Sommer 1942 Mil.Rangordnung 257.Inf.Div. MG-Komp.eines Inf.Batl. Kgf.-Lagerorganisation Kriegstagebücher Allgemeines Zu einzelnen Zeitabschnitten Linkliste Originalmanuskript |
- ↑ The German Classics of the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries/Volume 10/Letters and Historical Writings of Moltke/The Peace Movement
- ↑ Heraclitus, cited by Hippolytus, Ref. haer. ix. 9 (Fragment 53)
- ↑ Cf. footnote 5 of 29.7.45
- ↑ President of the Bundestag Wolfgang Schäuble said the same on 26 April 2020, referring to Grundgesetz Article 1.
- ↑ Bible: Matth 10. 39.; Matth 16. 25.; Mark 8. 35.; Luke 9. 24.; Luke 17. 33.; John 12. 25.
- ↑ The theodicy is very much a topic of theology, which had to undergo a radical paradigm shift particularly as a result of the Nazi crimes (cf. e.g. Wikipedia).
- ↑ Bible: John 15. 20.
- ↑ Bible: John 12. 24.
- ↑ The quote is – also according to the Kudrun expert Prof. Uta Störmer-Caysa – not from the Kudrun epic.
- ↑ The author recounted that during his time as an SA member, meetings were always scheduled at the time of the church service. Annoyed, he therefore changed to the HJ
- ↑ in the original ‘him’
- ↑ in the original “Queen”; this probably refers to Ribbentrop’s faux pas when he did not greet the king with the usual three bows when presenting his credentials, but with the Hitler salute (The Central Queensland Herald, 11 Feb 1937, p. 42); in Germany this event was concealed or trivialised and packaged in baiting
- ↑ yellow also according to WDR radio, but according to Wikipedia they remained blue
- ↑ Claudia Mareike Katrin Schwabe: Romanticism, Orientalism, and National Identity. German Literary Fairy Tales, 1795-1848, p. 116
- ↑ Friedrich Ebert
- ↑ Probably Willy Brandt is meant, narrowing down the writing of this section of the typescript to the years of his chancellorship (1969 to 1974)
- ↑ Hyperion, or the Hermit in Greece. By Friedrich Hölderlin, translated by Howard Gaskill, p. 25
- ↑ Certainly fits in with the ideas of Plato or Aristotle.
- ↑ In fact, victim protection began in the 1970s, just as this diary was being written.
- ↑ cf. footnote 6
- ↑ V. I. Lenin: Socialism and War
- ↑ Helsinki Final Act of 1 August 1975; also dating aid for this section of the typescript
- ↑ see footnote 9 of 29.7.45
- ↑ probably Francesco Saverio Nitti The Wreck of Europe (L’Europa senza pace, 1921)
- ↑ in the original on his deathbed; the year is taken from Wikiquote