This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Prewar Czechoslovakia was not only inhabited by Czechs, Slovaks, Germans and Hungarians but also by another important minority, the Jews (not mentioned here). Not much of them survived the World War II. Czech Jews were an integral part of the Czech history, for most of them there was no return and there was no chance to restore the prewar demographic structure. Cepek 09:16, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
Also I am missing at least some information on Nazi's plans for most of the Czech population. Cepek 09:16, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
The historical background ("renewed constitution" ...) is a bit simplified from my point of view. Cepek 09:16, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
What possibly might be stressed is the personal role of Edvard Beneš. Cepek 09:16, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
This article only speaks about the Germans in in Bohemia and Moravia ("Czech lands"). The post-war expulsion of Carpathian Germans from Slovakia is not mentioned at all. -- AtonX ( talk) 07:26, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
The following text was copied from my Talk Page...
Several notes to the Expulsion from Czechoslovakia: Benes proclaimed the program of the newly appointed Czechoslovak government Beneš was not the head of the government, only prime-minister or government as the team is competent to do this.
It is not equal to describe the "Sbor poverenikov" (Board of Slovak Commissioners) as the "an appendage of the Czechoslovak government in Bratislava" The process was complex, but in 1945, till 20 October), "Sbor poverenikov Slovenskej narodnej rady" was an executive part of the Slovak national committee (SNC), and thus fully independent on the Czechoslovak government. Since 28 oct. 1945 to February 1948 the decreasing influnce of SNC meant that the "Sbor" slowly changed into the the detachment of central government. After February 1948 the independence of all Slovak administration was only nominal (though in theory survived till 1960).
So called "reslovakization" reffers only to Slovak territory.
"various forms of persecution, including: expulsions, deportations, internments, peoples court procedures, citizenship revocations, property confiscation, condemnation to forced labour camps, involuntary changes of nationality" I'm not sure if the criminal proceedings and trial shall be involved among "forms of persecution"
"citizenship revocations" again - the decree No. 33/1945 in absolute most of causes only had confirmed the German and Hungarian citizenship the people obtained after 1938. Only several hundreds or thousands cases the citizenship was removed. The "involuntary changes of nationality" were rare and I don't know any case like this. The official policy was Germans must go! - including the Czech members of families.
military command "Alex" was only one organisation of resistance and uprising amd has no broad influence. Honzula 10:35, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
Twice the same. Xx236 12:59, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
Total idiocy. There is a German-Czech agreement. Who knows better than Czech and Germans? Xx236 13:01, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
The same the arrival of Czechs from Silesia. Xx236 13:03, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
I'm sorry if I was unprecize. I believe that the expulsion of Hungarians should be mentioned/linked, eg. in "See also", not described here. The arrival of Czechs from Silesia should be described here, because they partially replaced expelled Germans. Xx236 06:19, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
Ethnic homogenization is a little klunky, and although after has been used on other articles, wouldn't that include any ethnic homogenization since 1945? How about Forced emigrations from Czechoslovakia following World War II or Forced emigrations from post-war Czechoslovakia? TheMightyQuill 02:44, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
I mean the transfer of Czechs from Lower Silesia, formerly German, later Polish. Eg. from Kłodzko region. Xx236 10:40, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
" Forced migration" is a statndard term. See also " population transfer". `' mikka 23:25, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
The first sentence of this section reads...
This matches pretty closely what User:Honzula wrote. I didn't understand the point he was making when I put it in and I still don't understand it. Honzula, can you clarify what this is trying to say?
-- Richard 15:27, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
I deleted a sentence in this issue which was totally incorrect and not based on a reliable source. Even orthographically it was incorrect. (cf. Talk:Expulsion of Germans after World War II). Money which Germany paid according to the de:Lastenausgleichsgesetz was given not only to Sudetengermans but to all Germans which had any property/economic losses during the war. If you consider how much Germany was destroyed by allied bombers (e. g. Bombing of Dresden in World War II) there wasn't much left for the individual. It was just ment as "initial aid", not more. Germany has never pretended to have compensated German expellees for their losses. - Wikiferdi 23:41, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
what is the relevance of concentration camp workers to those expelled? Their is no connection between the two. -- Jadger 05:09, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
So? and why should Germany pay them both the same? they didn't both go through the same experiences. The money given to Germans that were expelled, stays in Germany and gets invested; the money given to foreigners goes *poof* and is never seen again, it doesn't get invested back into the German economy.
There is no link between the two, except that they both received a hand-out from the German gov't. but if that's the case, why don't we compare it to the unemployment cheques German citizens receive when they aren't working?
-- Jadger 15:49, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
(cf. [1])
“ | Germanic tribes actually lived on modern-day Czech territory well before Slavic tribes arrived around 500 AD. However, neither the Germanic nor the Slavic populations of the fifth century would have qualified as German or Czech in the modern sense. While from the second to the fifth century the population was probably mainly Germanic and Celtic tribes, it is generally acknowledged that Slavic settlers became the majority by the seventh century. Most of the remaining populations assimilated with the newly arrived Slavs, although west and northwest Bohemia remained mostly Germanic due to strong Frankish influence. German and Latin remained the prevalent language of the Royal House and the aristocracy, even among the Přemyslid dynasty. | ” |
- Wikiferdi 00:31, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
“ | Sudeten Germans supposedly all voted for the Nazi puppet Sudeten German Party (SdP) of Konrad Henlein with the sole purpose of destroying Czechoslovakia, Central Europe's last island of freedom and democracy at the time.
These accusations are based on the theory of collective guilt, or, as the Constitutional Court argued in defense of the Beneš Decrees, the principle of collective responsibility. The current state uses historic events like the 1935 election to defend and justify the forced expulsion of one-third of the country's historic population and the resulting disappearance of one of the country's historic languages. Although much literature contains detailed analyses of these elections, few facts have become public. A close look reveals that a substantial part of the Sudeten Germans did not vote for the SdP, despite the enormous anti-Czech propaganda coming from Nazi Germany. Henlein received around two-thirds of the votes of the four main German parties but a strong communist vote also marked the highly industrialized north Bohemia. Also, some Sudeten Germans did not vote, while others supported Czech or Hungarian parties. The SdP is likely to have received 50 percent to 55 percent of the Sudeten German vote. Among all the German-speaking population, Henlein received only 35 percent. And those who voted SdP voted for an official party program calling for Sudeten German autonomy within a democratic Czechoslovakia. (cf. [2]) |
” |
I confer to free elections and not to elections influenced by Nazi force and Nazi propaganda. Such results of polls which you mention (that obviously took place after the Anschluss of the Sudetenland) are common to dictatorships.
Concerning the time before 1938 the situation in the Sudetenland is described by Prof. de Zayas:
“ | It has been frequently suggested that Henlein was a sinister schemer and his SdP nothing more than a subversive Nazi organization bent on the destruction of Czechoslvak independence. It is easy to understand how these notions arose, yet neither Henlein at the outset of his political career nor the SdP for many years of its development had anything to do with the National Socialist movement in Germany. Both were originally dedicated to a democratic settlement of the Sudeten German question, which was to be achieved by peaceful negotiations in the Czech parliament. All attemps to reach an acceptable settlement, however, failed, and the gradual escalation of the Czech-Sudten confrontation resulted in forcing Henlein into the arms of Adolf Hitler, who promised to provide an international sounding board for the Sudeten case. […] Hitler of course, more than welcomed the opportunity of making the Sudeten case his own and did not hesitate to misuse the principle of self-determination as a weapon to further his own Lebensraum policy. (cf. Nemesis at Potsdam, Routledge & Kegan Paul, London 1977 ISBN 0710084684, pp. 28f) | ” |
- Wikiferdi 23:04, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
“ | Posl. Śliwka: Autonomja jest pierwsze dopiero hasło, które wyjął pan poseł Wolf z programu wyraźnie henleinowskiego i zagranicznego. To jest pretekst do faszyzacji, pretekst do nowej Malhommiady. (Posl. dr Eichholz: Sie haben ja noch das Selbstbestimmungsrecht vor ein paar Jahren verlangt!) Schauen Sie, mein lieber Herr, wenn Sie über die polnische Minderheit, über die Polen sprechen . . . (Posl. dr Neuwirth: Sie Asiate!)
Posl. Śliwka (pokračuje): Wenn Sie über die polnischen Minderheiten sprechen wollen . . . (Posl. dr Neuwirth: Abtreten, Asien abtreten! Abtreten!) Posl. Śliwka (pokračuje): Sie haben kein Recht hier über Polen zu sprechen! (Výkřiky posl. Širokého.) Posl. Śliwka (pokračuje): Široký, das hat doch keinen Sinn. Posl. Śliwka (pokračuje): Lieber Herr, schauen Sie, die Sache ist klar. Wenn Sie unsere polnischen Minderheiten verteidigen wollen, geben Sie in Deutschland den Polen wenigstens das, was wir hier in der Republik haben. (Potlesk komunistických poslanců.) Wir haben hier in der Čechoslovakischen Republik auf hundertdreißigtausend Polen 84 Volksschulen und in Deutschland kommen auf 1,500.000 Polen nur 24 Schulen. (Posl. Dr. Neuwirth: Das überlassen Sie dem Beck.) Das ist Ihre Arbeit. Wenn Sie Ordnung und Rechte für Deutsche wollen, dann schauen Sie, daß Ordnung und Rechte für Polen auch in Deutschland werden. |
” |
This is mentioned about the Usti massacre. Is it true? Does the referenced source (Z. Beneš, Rozumět dějinám) really confirm it or is it only referencing to the massacre in general? Irwing 10:58, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
I've removed a paragraph of text from this article as it appears to be a copyright violation, copied from [4]. I also removed the speedy deletion tag added to highlight the copyvio as this was inappropiate as there appears to be only one infringing paragraph. Dpmuk ( talk) 11:18, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:World War II evacuation and expulsion which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. — RFC bot 03:30, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
It appears there is no separate article for the expulsion of Hungarians. I think it would be a sensible solution to have one common article for the expulsion of both Germans and Hungarians from Czechoslovakia, since it was the same event, with the same "legal" basis. I suggest we move the article to Expulsion of Germans and Hungarians from Czechoslovakia. We should also expand on the fate of Hungarians. Nagykanizsa ( talk) 10:42, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
I have a very specific issue with the "concentration camps" part - the only source attached to it comes from "Society Against Expulsion" website, which is a group founded with a very specific view of the real history in mind. Until that part can be supported by some substantial information, this article is severely compromised. -- 213.129.141.95 ( talk) 14:20, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
Nor does this article, for that matter, present the view of Czech historians, and it gives an undue platform to just one view of the issue. -- 147.228.209.170 ( talk) 23:33, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
Well for example the entire "concentration camps" section. As I wrote, The only source for that comes from "society against expulsion" which is definitely not a neutral source. Nor does that source cite where does it's informations come from.
Additionally the article as a whole does not present Czech point of view, and instead relies on all sorts of weasel words and explanation of history revisionists. -- 213.129.142.10 ( talk) 02:10, 20 February 2010 (UT
Why not just add Czech points of view to the text? Everybody is free to do that. The word "Revisionsm" has got a Communist connotation and is actually not used in a democratic world.-- Wurzeln und Flügel ( talk) 19:09, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
> the only source attached to it comes from "Society Against Expulsion" website
I came here to say the exact same thing regarding many of the sources in this article. It might not be so bad if those societies used citations in their own publications, but they don't, it's just pages of text accusations and claims with no substantiation.
> "there are Czech sources, the article on Czech wiki mentions"
Hmmm. It's frustrating to think that we can't mention or have something in the English wiki just because we can't find good English sources, when lots of sources in other languages exist. But a great many of us can't judge the veracity of such sources, because we don't speak those other languages. What's the wikipedia policy on how to proceed in such circumstances? Search harder for English citations (in scholarly journals and books) that might summarize what we need? Wait for a history prof who is a subject matter expert to happen by? Or can we trust the czech wiipedia article and it's references and use them as is, without finding a czech english speaker to vouch for them?
CraigWyllie ( talk) 08:14, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
Again, I beg the Polish and Czech editors to please go to the local library and add material to these articles, my Polish is only basic-- Woogie10w ( talk) 14:46, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
This external link ( Execution of German Civilians in Prague (May 1945)) was removed by User:Yopie. It shows a part of a Czech TV documentary recently broadcasted by the Czech TV. The German Der Spiegel magazine also wrote about the amateur film which was made by a Czech eyewitness ( Spiegel article). Yopie, could you please explain your reasons. HerkusMonte ( talk) 06:29, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
The article uses the term “German” when the correct thing would be “Austrian” then Bohemia and Moravia was territory of the Habsburg from the end of the Middle Age. Sudetes therefore was of the Austrian Empire and the Austrohungarian, in addition they comprised of the insolvent state of Germanic Austria and of to have drawn up to ethnic borders after 1ª World war they would not have been of Germany, but yes of Austria. -- 84.120.13.9 ( talk) 03:35, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
"German" does seem to be the appropriate terminology here. My family is from Bohemia and we are Germans. All of my grandparents' and parents' birth certificates state "German." (TE)
There is no Austrian ethnicity only a German ethnicity, that's why these people are Germans. --
Jonny84 (
talk) 00:13, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
Only minimum of people were deported from Hlučín area despite the fact that they were mostly German. This needs to be adderessed in the article. Cimmerian praetor ( talk) 19:08, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
Another exemption listed are those married to Czech citizens. My grandmother on my mother's side was Czech, yet my German grandfather was deported nevertheless. This should not be listed as such a generalized statement here. (TE) — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
98.24.212.17 (
talk) 22:35, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
Some Germans run away before the arrival of the Red Army (300 000 ?). Some run away later like Peter Glotz. Xx236 ( talk) 10:31, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
Jonny84 ( talk) 00:20, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
Dear posp68, first: Learn the difference between the words Bohemian and Czech. Second: Czechoslovakia was founded in 1918, some centuries after the settling of Germans in Bohemia, if you mind logical comparisons... So the Czechoslovakian army knew very well what they incorporated into their state.. --
Jonny84 (
talk) 17:39, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
THE CZECH KINGDOM
The Czech state was formed in the 9th century under the Great Moravian Empire and is one of the oldest states in Central Europe. The Czech Kingdom of Bohemia and Magraviate of Moravia were historical lands (Crown of Saint Václav - in Latin Wenceslas), they existed with strong kings of House of Přemyslid. Official name was Čechy (Cžechy) - in Latin Bohemia (Old Czech was known as Bohemian language in Latin). Until the end of 14th century, all laws were in Latin, and Latin was of course used in foreign relations.
As a kingdom Čechy, or in Latin Bohemia, antedates the Germans kingdoms, not excepting Saxony, Bavaria and Prussia. German immigrants have known very well where they settled from the very beginning. They were a minority in the Czech Kingdom, not a nation, and most countries in Europe have minorities.
Holy Roman Empire was not a State and consequently had no capital city.
It was a series of independent Kingdoms and princedoms that existed as a loose religious confederation, and the title of Emperor itself was an elected position, rather unusal for an Empire, a title given by the Pope that the Pope never had the right to give .
Czech Kings were also elected Emperors.
In 1526, the Austrian Duke Ferdinand was elected and crowned the Czech King when the Turks was at the gates of Vienna. (At that time, 10 percent of the population in the Czech kingdom were German immigrants.) The following year, he was elected Hungarian King.
With the same right, the Czechs left the Habsburgs in 1918.
During the Habsburg misrule of the Czech Lands, the Czech language was removed from public administration and higher education.
The correct term is Czech Crown Jewels - in Latin Bohemian Crown Jewels - because Bohemia was never the name of the country in Czech language (the language of the nation).--
Posp68 (
talk) 16:05, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
Xx236 ( talk) 10:10, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
Xx236 ( talk) 09:55, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
cs:Tomáš Staněk, author of several books. Xx236 ( talk) 09:58, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
Throughout the whole article I can't see any section that would describe WHY Czechs wanted Germans to leave their country. A serious flaw in the article. -- MyMoloboaccount ( talk) 20:55, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 3 external links on
Expulsion of Germans from Czechoslovakia. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 11:13, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Expulsion of Germans from Czechoslovakia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 14:37, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Expulsion of Germans from Czechoslovakia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 11:11, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
According to Iranian and other anti-Jewish websites, the image of open railcars stuffed with people at a train station is from the expulsion of Sudeten Germans from Czechoslovakia. They claim it was widely used since the 1980s as an image of Jewish expulsion to Auschwitz. Can someone find a link to the source of this picture or help get the picture up? פשוט pashute ♫ ( talk) 23:50, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page have been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussions at the nomination pages linked above. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 01:45, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the
nomination page. —
Community Tech bot (
talk) 05:06, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
Is this "Cummunity Tech bot" a crypto Nazi Supporter?-- Posp68 ( talk) 14:52, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
There's a file on the page that's been deleted from Commons, "Češi vyhnaní z pohraničí hledají nový domov.jpg". Can someone with the necessary privileges remove it? - Sumanuil ( talk) 20:32, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
Posp68 there are two problems with your recent addition (besides some minor grammar points and a citation error):
As I compromise, I suggest removing the longer quotation, and changing the main text to:
At the Paris Peace Conference in 1919, Harvard professor Archibald Cary Coolidge submitted his report to the American Delegation proposing the separation of the Sudetenland from Bohemia and Moravia (historical lands of the Bohemian Crown), since it appeared unwise to force 3.5 million Germans under Czech rule, in violation of the principle of self-determination. [1]
Instead, the U.S. commission to the Paris Peace Conference issued a declaration which gave unanimous support for maintaining the Sudentenland as part of Czechoslovakia. [2].
-- Ermenrich ( talk) 20:35, 23 May 2020 (UTC)
I disagree
Neither Austria-Hungary nor anyone else had recognized any Sudetenland. German immigrants to the Czech Lands have known very well where they settled from the very beginning also those who arrived after the Thirty Years' War. What the U.S. Commission to the Paris Peace Conference in 1919 came up with is the most important thing, far more important than Archibald Coolidge, and must be stated in the article.--
Posp68 (
talk) 15:00, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
I don't think Archibald Cary Coolidge used the word Sudetenland. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
84.209.61.213 (
talk) 08:35, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
I have removed the quote mark. The designation Czech lands is correct. Encyclopedia Britannica Britannica
--
Posp68 (
talk) 10:29, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
I've removed the offending paragraph entirely. The issue of the Paris Peace Conference isn't related to plans to expel Sudeten Germans (it predates them by nearly 20 years) and it's clear that the proposal by some US delegate was added by a someone trying to drum up sympathy for the Sudeten Germans. There's no reason it (or its rejection) should be in this article, such things are better handled in another article.-- Ermenrich ( talk) 14:24, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
References
{{
cite book}}
: |work=
ignored (
help)
Can anyone verify that Beneš actually used this phrase? It seems like the sort thing a German right winger would make up, given its use of the phrase the Final Solution.- Ermenrich ( talk) 15:16, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
( [11]) ("worst case we have to execute the final solution by ourselves").( KIENGIR ( talk) 08:58, 9 June 2020 (UTC))
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Add diacritics to (divoky odsun) -> (divoký odsun). 2001:1AE9:361:2400:31A7:7BC7:BAB9:44AB ( talk) 23:43, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
Who was considered "German"? I read in Klement Gottwald_
He had a German surname, but was not meaning people like himself. In Talk:Klement_Gottwald, I read:
So, can you clarify who the expulsion proponents meant as "Germans"? All people with German surnames? People classified as German in the census? German nobles? -- Error ( talk) 21:26, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Prewar Czechoslovakia was not only inhabited by Czechs, Slovaks, Germans and Hungarians but also by another important minority, the Jews (not mentioned here). Not much of them survived the World War II. Czech Jews were an integral part of the Czech history, for most of them there was no return and there was no chance to restore the prewar demographic structure. Cepek 09:16, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
Also I am missing at least some information on Nazi's plans for most of the Czech population. Cepek 09:16, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
The historical background ("renewed constitution" ...) is a bit simplified from my point of view. Cepek 09:16, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
What possibly might be stressed is the personal role of Edvard Beneš. Cepek 09:16, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
This article only speaks about the Germans in in Bohemia and Moravia ("Czech lands"). The post-war expulsion of Carpathian Germans from Slovakia is not mentioned at all. -- AtonX ( talk) 07:26, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
The following text was copied from my Talk Page...
Several notes to the Expulsion from Czechoslovakia: Benes proclaimed the program of the newly appointed Czechoslovak government Beneš was not the head of the government, only prime-minister or government as the team is competent to do this.
It is not equal to describe the "Sbor poverenikov" (Board of Slovak Commissioners) as the "an appendage of the Czechoslovak government in Bratislava" The process was complex, but in 1945, till 20 October), "Sbor poverenikov Slovenskej narodnej rady" was an executive part of the Slovak national committee (SNC), and thus fully independent on the Czechoslovak government. Since 28 oct. 1945 to February 1948 the decreasing influnce of SNC meant that the "Sbor" slowly changed into the the detachment of central government. After February 1948 the independence of all Slovak administration was only nominal (though in theory survived till 1960).
So called "reslovakization" reffers only to Slovak territory.
"various forms of persecution, including: expulsions, deportations, internments, peoples court procedures, citizenship revocations, property confiscation, condemnation to forced labour camps, involuntary changes of nationality" I'm not sure if the criminal proceedings and trial shall be involved among "forms of persecution"
"citizenship revocations" again - the decree No. 33/1945 in absolute most of causes only had confirmed the German and Hungarian citizenship the people obtained after 1938. Only several hundreds or thousands cases the citizenship was removed. The "involuntary changes of nationality" were rare and I don't know any case like this. The official policy was Germans must go! - including the Czech members of families.
military command "Alex" was only one organisation of resistance and uprising amd has no broad influence. Honzula 10:35, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
Twice the same. Xx236 12:59, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
Total idiocy. There is a German-Czech agreement. Who knows better than Czech and Germans? Xx236 13:01, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
The same the arrival of Czechs from Silesia. Xx236 13:03, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
I'm sorry if I was unprecize. I believe that the expulsion of Hungarians should be mentioned/linked, eg. in "See also", not described here. The arrival of Czechs from Silesia should be described here, because they partially replaced expelled Germans. Xx236 06:19, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
Ethnic homogenization is a little klunky, and although after has been used on other articles, wouldn't that include any ethnic homogenization since 1945? How about Forced emigrations from Czechoslovakia following World War II or Forced emigrations from post-war Czechoslovakia? TheMightyQuill 02:44, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
I mean the transfer of Czechs from Lower Silesia, formerly German, later Polish. Eg. from Kłodzko region. Xx236 10:40, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
" Forced migration" is a statndard term. See also " population transfer". `' mikka 23:25, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
The first sentence of this section reads...
This matches pretty closely what User:Honzula wrote. I didn't understand the point he was making when I put it in and I still don't understand it. Honzula, can you clarify what this is trying to say?
-- Richard 15:27, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
I deleted a sentence in this issue which was totally incorrect and not based on a reliable source. Even orthographically it was incorrect. (cf. Talk:Expulsion of Germans after World War II). Money which Germany paid according to the de:Lastenausgleichsgesetz was given not only to Sudetengermans but to all Germans which had any property/economic losses during the war. If you consider how much Germany was destroyed by allied bombers (e. g. Bombing of Dresden in World War II) there wasn't much left for the individual. It was just ment as "initial aid", not more. Germany has never pretended to have compensated German expellees for their losses. - Wikiferdi 23:41, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
what is the relevance of concentration camp workers to those expelled? Their is no connection between the two. -- Jadger 05:09, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
So? and why should Germany pay them both the same? they didn't both go through the same experiences. The money given to Germans that were expelled, stays in Germany and gets invested; the money given to foreigners goes *poof* and is never seen again, it doesn't get invested back into the German economy.
There is no link between the two, except that they both received a hand-out from the German gov't. but if that's the case, why don't we compare it to the unemployment cheques German citizens receive when they aren't working?
-- Jadger 15:49, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
(cf. [1])
“ | Germanic tribes actually lived on modern-day Czech territory well before Slavic tribes arrived around 500 AD. However, neither the Germanic nor the Slavic populations of the fifth century would have qualified as German or Czech in the modern sense. While from the second to the fifth century the population was probably mainly Germanic and Celtic tribes, it is generally acknowledged that Slavic settlers became the majority by the seventh century. Most of the remaining populations assimilated with the newly arrived Slavs, although west and northwest Bohemia remained mostly Germanic due to strong Frankish influence. German and Latin remained the prevalent language of the Royal House and the aristocracy, even among the Přemyslid dynasty. | ” |
- Wikiferdi 00:31, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
“ | Sudeten Germans supposedly all voted for the Nazi puppet Sudeten German Party (SdP) of Konrad Henlein with the sole purpose of destroying Czechoslovakia, Central Europe's last island of freedom and democracy at the time.
These accusations are based on the theory of collective guilt, or, as the Constitutional Court argued in defense of the Beneš Decrees, the principle of collective responsibility. The current state uses historic events like the 1935 election to defend and justify the forced expulsion of one-third of the country's historic population and the resulting disappearance of one of the country's historic languages. Although much literature contains detailed analyses of these elections, few facts have become public. A close look reveals that a substantial part of the Sudeten Germans did not vote for the SdP, despite the enormous anti-Czech propaganda coming from Nazi Germany. Henlein received around two-thirds of the votes of the four main German parties but a strong communist vote also marked the highly industrialized north Bohemia. Also, some Sudeten Germans did not vote, while others supported Czech or Hungarian parties. The SdP is likely to have received 50 percent to 55 percent of the Sudeten German vote. Among all the German-speaking population, Henlein received only 35 percent. And those who voted SdP voted for an official party program calling for Sudeten German autonomy within a democratic Czechoslovakia. (cf. [2]) |
” |
I confer to free elections and not to elections influenced by Nazi force and Nazi propaganda. Such results of polls which you mention (that obviously took place after the Anschluss of the Sudetenland) are common to dictatorships.
Concerning the time before 1938 the situation in the Sudetenland is described by Prof. de Zayas:
“ | It has been frequently suggested that Henlein was a sinister schemer and his SdP nothing more than a subversive Nazi organization bent on the destruction of Czechoslvak independence. It is easy to understand how these notions arose, yet neither Henlein at the outset of his political career nor the SdP for many years of its development had anything to do with the National Socialist movement in Germany. Both were originally dedicated to a democratic settlement of the Sudeten German question, which was to be achieved by peaceful negotiations in the Czech parliament. All attemps to reach an acceptable settlement, however, failed, and the gradual escalation of the Czech-Sudten confrontation resulted in forcing Henlein into the arms of Adolf Hitler, who promised to provide an international sounding board for the Sudeten case. […] Hitler of course, more than welcomed the opportunity of making the Sudeten case his own and did not hesitate to misuse the principle of self-determination as a weapon to further his own Lebensraum policy. (cf. Nemesis at Potsdam, Routledge & Kegan Paul, London 1977 ISBN 0710084684, pp. 28f) | ” |
- Wikiferdi 23:04, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
“ | Posl. Śliwka: Autonomja jest pierwsze dopiero hasło, które wyjął pan poseł Wolf z programu wyraźnie henleinowskiego i zagranicznego. To jest pretekst do faszyzacji, pretekst do nowej Malhommiady. (Posl. dr Eichholz: Sie haben ja noch das Selbstbestimmungsrecht vor ein paar Jahren verlangt!) Schauen Sie, mein lieber Herr, wenn Sie über die polnische Minderheit, über die Polen sprechen . . . (Posl. dr Neuwirth: Sie Asiate!)
Posl. Śliwka (pokračuje): Wenn Sie über die polnischen Minderheiten sprechen wollen . . . (Posl. dr Neuwirth: Abtreten, Asien abtreten! Abtreten!) Posl. Śliwka (pokračuje): Sie haben kein Recht hier über Polen zu sprechen! (Výkřiky posl. Širokého.) Posl. Śliwka (pokračuje): Široký, das hat doch keinen Sinn. Posl. Śliwka (pokračuje): Lieber Herr, schauen Sie, die Sache ist klar. Wenn Sie unsere polnischen Minderheiten verteidigen wollen, geben Sie in Deutschland den Polen wenigstens das, was wir hier in der Republik haben. (Potlesk komunistických poslanců.) Wir haben hier in der Čechoslovakischen Republik auf hundertdreißigtausend Polen 84 Volksschulen und in Deutschland kommen auf 1,500.000 Polen nur 24 Schulen. (Posl. Dr. Neuwirth: Das überlassen Sie dem Beck.) Das ist Ihre Arbeit. Wenn Sie Ordnung und Rechte für Deutsche wollen, dann schauen Sie, daß Ordnung und Rechte für Polen auch in Deutschland werden. |
” |
This is mentioned about the Usti massacre. Is it true? Does the referenced source (Z. Beneš, Rozumět dějinám) really confirm it or is it only referencing to the massacre in general? Irwing 10:58, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
I've removed a paragraph of text from this article as it appears to be a copyright violation, copied from [4]. I also removed the speedy deletion tag added to highlight the copyvio as this was inappropiate as there appears to be only one infringing paragraph. Dpmuk ( talk) 11:18, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:World War II evacuation and expulsion which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. — RFC bot 03:30, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
It appears there is no separate article for the expulsion of Hungarians. I think it would be a sensible solution to have one common article for the expulsion of both Germans and Hungarians from Czechoslovakia, since it was the same event, with the same "legal" basis. I suggest we move the article to Expulsion of Germans and Hungarians from Czechoslovakia. We should also expand on the fate of Hungarians. Nagykanizsa ( talk) 10:42, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
I have a very specific issue with the "concentration camps" part - the only source attached to it comes from "Society Against Expulsion" website, which is a group founded with a very specific view of the real history in mind. Until that part can be supported by some substantial information, this article is severely compromised. -- 213.129.141.95 ( talk) 14:20, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
Nor does this article, for that matter, present the view of Czech historians, and it gives an undue platform to just one view of the issue. -- 147.228.209.170 ( talk) 23:33, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
Well for example the entire "concentration camps" section. As I wrote, The only source for that comes from "society against expulsion" which is definitely not a neutral source. Nor does that source cite where does it's informations come from.
Additionally the article as a whole does not present Czech point of view, and instead relies on all sorts of weasel words and explanation of history revisionists. -- 213.129.142.10 ( talk) 02:10, 20 February 2010 (UT
Why not just add Czech points of view to the text? Everybody is free to do that. The word "Revisionsm" has got a Communist connotation and is actually not used in a democratic world.-- Wurzeln und Flügel ( talk) 19:09, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
> the only source attached to it comes from "Society Against Expulsion" website
I came here to say the exact same thing regarding many of the sources in this article. It might not be so bad if those societies used citations in their own publications, but they don't, it's just pages of text accusations and claims with no substantiation.
> "there are Czech sources, the article on Czech wiki mentions"
Hmmm. It's frustrating to think that we can't mention or have something in the English wiki just because we can't find good English sources, when lots of sources in other languages exist. But a great many of us can't judge the veracity of such sources, because we don't speak those other languages. What's the wikipedia policy on how to proceed in such circumstances? Search harder for English citations (in scholarly journals and books) that might summarize what we need? Wait for a history prof who is a subject matter expert to happen by? Or can we trust the czech wiipedia article and it's references and use them as is, without finding a czech english speaker to vouch for them?
CraigWyllie ( talk) 08:14, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
Again, I beg the Polish and Czech editors to please go to the local library and add material to these articles, my Polish is only basic-- Woogie10w ( talk) 14:46, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
This external link ( Execution of German Civilians in Prague (May 1945)) was removed by User:Yopie. It shows a part of a Czech TV documentary recently broadcasted by the Czech TV. The German Der Spiegel magazine also wrote about the amateur film which was made by a Czech eyewitness ( Spiegel article). Yopie, could you please explain your reasons. HerkusMonte ( talk) 06:29, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
The article uses the term “German” when the correct thing would be “Austrian” then Bohemia and Moravia was territory of the Habsburg from the end of the Middle Age. Sudetes therefore was of the Austrian Empire and the Austrohungarian, in addition they comprised of the insolvent state of Germanic Austria and of to have drawn up to ethnic borders after 1ª World war they would not have been of Germany, but yes of Austria. -- 84.120.13.9 ( talk) 03:35, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
"German" does seem to be the appropriate terminology here. My family is from Bohemia and we are Germans. All of my grandparents' and parents' birth certificates state "German." (TE)
There is no Austrian ethnicity only a German ethnicity, that's why these people are Germans. --
Jonny84 (
talk) 00:13, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
Only minimum of people were deported from Hlučín area despite the fact that they were mostly German. This needs to be adderessed in the article. Cimmerian praetor ( talk) 19:08, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
Another exemption listed are those married to Czech citizens. My grandmother on my mother's side was Czech, yet my German grandfather was deported nevertheless. This should not be listed as such a generalized statement here. (TE) — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
98.24.212.17 (
talk) 22:35, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
Some Germans run away before the arrival of the Red Army (300 000 ?). Some run away later like Peter Glotz. Xx236 ( talk) 10:31, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
Jonny84 ( talk) 00:20, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
Dear posp68, first: Learn the difference between the words Bohemian and Czech. Second: Czechoslovakia was founded in 1918, some centuries after the settling of Germans in Bohemia, if you mind logical comparisons... So the Czechoslovakian army knew very well what they incorporated into their state.. --
Jonny84 (
talk) 17:39, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
THE CZECH KINGDOM
The Czech state was formed in the 9th century under the Great Moravian Empire and is one of the oldest states in Central Europe. The Czech Kingdom of Bohemia and Magraviate of Moravia were historical lands (Crown of Saint Václav - in Latin Wenceslas), they existed with strong kings of House of Přemyslid. Official name was Čechy (Cžechy) - in Latin Bohemia (Old Czech was known as Bohemian language in Latin). Until the end of 14th century, all laws were in Latin, and Latin was of course used in foreign relations.
As a kingdom Čechy, or in Latin Bohemia, antedates the Germans kingdoms, not excepting Saxony, Bavaria and Prussia. German immigrants have known very well where they settled from the very beginning. They were a minority in the Czech Kingdom, not a nation, and most countries in Europe have minorities.
Holy Roman Empire was not a State and consequently had no capital city.
It was a series of independent Kingdoms and princedoms that existed as a loose religious confederation, and the title of Emperor itself was an elected position, rather unusal for an Empire, a title given by the Pope that the Pope never had the right to give .
Czech Kings were also elected Emperors.
In 1526, the Austrian Duke Ferdinand was elected and crowned the Czech King when the Turks was at the gates of Vienna. (At that time, 10 percent of the population in the Czech kingdom were German immigrants.) The following year, he was elected Hungarian King.
With the same right, the Czechs left the Habsburgs in 1918.
During the Habsburg misrule of the Czech Lands, the Czech language was removed from public administration and higher education.
The correct term is Czech Crown Jewels - in Latin Bohemian Crown Jewels - because Bohemia was never the name of the country in Czech language (the language of the nation).--
Posp68 (
talk) 16:05, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
Xx236 ( talk) 10:10, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
Xx236 ( talk) 09:55, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
cs:Tomáš Staněk, author of several books. Xx236 ( talk) 09:58, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
Throughout the whole article I can't see any section that would describe WHY Czechs wanted Germans to leave their country. A serious flaw in the article. -- MyMoloboaccount ( talk) 20:55, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 3 external links on
Expulsion of Germans from Czechoslovakia. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 11:13, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Expulsion of Germans from Czechoslovakia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 14:37, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Expulsion of Germans from Czechoslovakia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 11:11, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
According to Iranian and other anti-Jewish websites, the image of open railcars stuffed with people at a train station is from the expulsion of Sudeten Germans from Czechoslovakia. They claim it was widely used since the 1980s as an image of Jewish expulsion to Auschwitz. Can someone find a link to the source of this picture or help get the picture up? פשוט pashute ♫ ( talk) 23:50, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page have been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussions at the nomination pages linked above. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 01:45, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the
nomination page. —
Community Tech bot (
talk) 05:06, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
Is this "Cummunity Tech bot" a crypto Nazi Supporter?-- Posp68 ( talk) 14:52, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
There's a file on the page that's been deleted from Commons, "Češi vyhnaní z pohraničí hledají nový domov.jpg". Can someone with the necessary privileges remove it? - Sumanuil ( talk) 20:32, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
Posp68 there are two problems with your recent addition (besides some minor grammar points and a citation error):
As I compromise, I suggest removing the longer quotation, and changing the main text to:
At the Paris Peace Conference in 1919, Harvard professor Archibald Cary Coolidge submitted his report to the American Delegation proposing the separation of the Sudetenland from Bohemia and Moravia (historical lands of the Bohemian Crown), since it appeared unwise to force 3.5 million Germans under Czech rule, in violation of the principle of self-determination. [1]
Instead, the U.S. commission to the Paris Peace Conference issued a declaration which gave unanimous support for maintaining the Sudentenland as part of Czechoslovakia. [2].
-- Ermenrich ( talk) 20:35, 23 May 2020 (UTC)
I disagree
Neither Austria-Hungary nor anyone else had recognized any Sudetenland. German immigrants to the Czech Lands have known very well where they settled from the very beginning also those who arrived after the Thirty Years' War. What the U.S. Commission to the Paris Peace Conference in 1919 came up with is the most important thing, far more important than Archibald Coolidge, and must be stated in the article.--
Posp68 (
talk) 15:00, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
I don't think Archibald Cary Coolidge used the word Sudetenland. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
84.209.61.213 (
talk) 08:35, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
I have removed the quote mark. The designation Czech lands is correct. Encyclopedia Britannica Britannica
--
Posp68 (
talk) 10:29, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
I've removed the offending paragraph entirely. The issue of the Paris Peace Conference isn't related to plans to expel Sudeten Germans (it predates them by nearly 20 years) and it's clear that the proposal by some US delegate was added by a someone trying to drum up sympathy for the Sudeten Germans. There's no reason it (or its rejection) should be in this article, such things are better handled in another article.-- Ermenrich ( talk) 14:24, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
References
{{
cite book}}
: |work=
ignored (
help)
Can anyone verify that Beneš actually used this phrase? It seems like the sort thing a German right winger would make up, given its use of the phrase the Final Solution.- Ermenrich ( talk) 15:16, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
( [11]) ("worst case we have to execute the final solution by ourselves").( KIENGIR ( talk) 08:58, 9 June 2020 (UTC))
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Add diacritics to (divoky odsun) -> (divoký odsun). 2001:1AE9:361:2400:31A7:7BC7:BAB9:44AB ( talk) 23:43, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
Who was considered "German"? I read in Klement Gottwald_
He had a German surname, but was not meaning people like himself. In Talk:Klement_Gottwald, I read:
So, can you clarify who the expulsion proponents meant as "Germans"? All people with German surnames? People classified as German in the census? German nobles? -- Error ( talk) 21:26, 15 August 2021 (UTC)