Salzburg, Austria
The strange case of Austria
By Joaquin Bochaca, from his Crimes of the Good Guys,
translated from the Spanish by Margaret Huffstickler with my assistance
United with the Third Reich by the Anschluss of 1938, Austria, in 1945, officially recovered its independence. It was not, however, a “liberated” country like the rest. The Allies considered that the Austrians had collaborated with excessive enthusiasm with Nazi Germany and, in consequence, if on the one hand they asserted the rebirth of the Austrian State, on the other they divided Austria, like Germany, into four zones of occupation and the decisions of the Austrian “government” had to be submitted provisionally for the approbation of a Council of Control of the so-called “Four Powers.”
Austria even had to pay reparations. The fact that they were modest—symbolic, almost–doesn’t obviate the fact that they were basically absurd. How the devil does it make sense for a victim [of the “invading Nazis”] to pay reparations [for what “Nazis” had done]?
In any case, one thing is certain: the Allied soldiers were strictly prohibited from carrying out pillage such as took place in the Occupied Reich, at least the Western Allies. The Russians, particularly in the Austrian capital of Vienna, committed many atrocities, although to a degree incomparably less than, for example, the Berlin Apocalypse.
Starting May 8, 1945, the new “government” of Austria promulgated a law, the so-called “Law of Prohibitions.” Well, now, isn’t it delicious that a government, officially democratic, is imposed without elections by the foreign occupation authorities, and that their first law—not voted on by any Parliament—is a list of prohibitions?
To the Austrians, who had finally “regained their freedom,” it was prohibited to:
a) disseminate National Socialist ideas,
b) disseminate racist ideas,
c) transmit criticism of Democracy, in writing or by word of mouth,
d) propose the union of Austria with Germany.
In addition, the National Socialist Party and all related organizations were outlawed. Also declared to be outlawed were all individuals who had belonged to the National Socialist Party between July 1, 1933 and March 13, 1938, the date of the Anschluss. Functionaries who fell into that category were fired and deprived of their pensions. Likewise, these “outlaws” could not, in the future, be government functionaries or community leaders, nor exercise certain liberal professions; they were also prohibited from disposing freely of their possessions and real estate: that is, they could not buy or sell anything, not a house, a piece of land, not a grand piano, not a shirt. “The fate that the law reserved for members of the SS, however”—wrote the French writer Sérant—”was even more severe; in addition to the listed sanctions they were subject to strict surveillance by the police, drafted for the most menial labor or sent to prison. This repressive law was soon widened to include members of the National Socialist Party and many “repressive” organizations.” [609] Finally, the Law of Prohibitions prescribed the death penalty for war criminals, among whom were included any holders of high posts in the Nazi hierarchy.
The People’s Tribunals opened their first session on August 13, 1945. These tribunals were composed of three judges, each one representing one of the three large political parties reconstituted after the “liberation,” that is The Populist Party, the Volkspartei (Catholic and conservative), the Socialist Party and the Communist Party. On June 12, 1946, Chancellor Figl, head of the new Austrian state, presented an official tally of the repression: 8,850 investigations of people accused of war crimes had been opened; over 3,360 investigations had been completed, 1,380 had resulted in charges. In the field of administrative “purification,” 149,044 functionaries—of whom 23,558 had been members of the National Socialist Party before the Anschluss—had been terminated. [610]
If the “Law of Prohibitions” could not be totally put in practice with reference to the elimination from public life of 600,000 people who comprised the intellectual elite of the country, it was for the obvious reason that doing such a thing was a practical impossibility. Nevertheless, these people were obliged to pay 20% higher taxes than their peers, penalties of various amounts were imposed on them and certain positions and professions were prohibited to them for five years. Moreover, it was established that Nazis categorized as ”important,” independently of any other penalties they might incur, would spend a minimum of two years in forced labor camps. Nazis categorized as “less important,” one year. In addition, 5,000 university students suspected of Nazism or belonging to Nazi families were forbidden to pursue their studies.
These iniquitous and arbitrary laws provoked vigorous protests. In fairness it should be pointed out that the chief expressions of disagreement came from religious figures, and specifically Catholics. Monsignor Rohsacher, Archbishop of Salzburg, accused the new Austrian government of being motivated by the spirit of revenge. The Bishop of Innsbruck, Monsignor Rusch, accused the government of arbitrariness and of employing vis à vis their political enemies the same methods with which they had always reproached them.
We do not wish to close this epigraph dedicated to Austria without reproducing a text by the French writer Pierre-Antoine Cousteau (who, btw, was the brother of the famous undersea explorer, Jacques-Yves Cousteau), who had taken refuge in Austria and was interned for some time in the Mockry Concentration Camp, near Bludenz (in the French Zone).
Here is what Cousteau has to tell us, referring to the month of June, 1945–that is, one month after the Allied victory:
“When the Anschluss took place in 1938, a dozen suspects were interned in Bludenz. This time 800 have been detained, that is, practically all the able-bodied men in Bludenz. On the other hand, could they have acted any differently? In the Greater Reich, any individual who occupied a position was automatically enrolled in a professional association, and this association bore the seal of the National Socialist trade union: there were National Socialist dairies, National Socialist veterinarians, National Socialist street sweepers; the cultural, artistic or sporting associations were likewise National Socialist. You could be a National Socialist butterfly collector, or a National Socialist clarinetist. Afterwards, to the Crusaders for Democracy, everything that appeared accompanied by this label was an exposure of a war crime. When we arrived at the Mockry Camp, many supects had been set free, but there were still several hundred there. [611]
*****
Endnotes:
609.. Paúu Sérant: El Destino de los Vencidos (The Fate of the Vanquished) p104.
610. Ibid. Id. Op. Cit. pl05.
611. P. A. Cousteau: Les lois de l´Hospitalité, pp145-146.
After the Western powers had occupied German . A regime of terror was unleashed on the German people . Factories were shut down or shipped abroad, fishing boats sunk , shortages introduced. I’D had to be carried and inspected. It was that bad for 3 years and opinion poll carried out by the Allies found the German people preferred Hitler to the Allies.
The American economic department stole 300 tons of paper from Germany in 1945. This 300 tons of paper were patents for inventions and discoveries made by the Germans .
Britain also had a jewish intelligence unit attached to the British army . In order to capture Nazis and beat a confession out of them.Yet jews were killing British personnel in Palestine and a bombing campaign in Britain.