Live data from Hacker News

Last German kaiser's heirs fight for riches lost behind Iron Curtain

news.yahoo.com

11–20 of 85 posts

Re: Last German kaiser's heirs fight for riches lost behind Iron Curtain

#11
post #8
post #6

> Under a 1994 law, people whose property was expropriated by the Soviet Union have a right to claim compensation -- but only if they did not "lend considerable support" to the Nazi regime. > In a newspaper in 1932, the crown prince called for people to vote for Adolf Hitler in the presidential election, he added. Seems rather straightforward to me.

That doesn't seem quite so straightforward actually. The Nazi regime wasn't a thing yet, as the Nazis had yet to seize power. How obvious was it at the time to Germans that the Nazis would turn out to be so horrible?

Very.

The nazis did exactly what they said they would do prior to this election - they rearmed Germany, killed the communists and marginalized all other parties, acquired “living room” in the east, expelled Jews from berlin (and then murdered them en mass) in a way that was completely consistent with what Nazi press organs such as the stormer and mein kampf told Germans they would.

People make a mistake comparing the nazis with present day political parties or characters like Trump. They were not - they were extraordinarily violent and racist by the standards of the day, to say nothing about modern day. They did little to hide it.

Re: Last German kaiser's heirs fight for riches lost behind Iron Curtain

#12
post #8
post #6

> Under a 1994 law, people whose property was expropriated by the Soviet Union have a right to claim compensation -- but only if they did not "lend considerable support" to the Nazi regime. > In a newspaper in 1932, the crown prince called for people to vote for Adolf Hitler in the presidential election, he added. Seems rather straightforward to me.

That doesn't seem quite so straightforward actually. The Nazi regime wasn't a thing yet, as the Nazis had yet to seize power. How obvious was it at the time to Germans that the Nazis would turn out to be so horrible?

They were a rabidly anti-Semitic party whose central principles were racial purity and complete submission to a single cult-like leader, a guy who wrote a book calling for Germany to conquer "living space" for ethnic Germans in Eastern Europe. This party had a paramilitary organization that beat up its political opponents in the streets. It wasn't difficult to see that the Nazis were horrible.

Re: Last German kaiser's heirs fight for riches lost behind Iron Curtain

#13
post #8
post #6

> Under a 1994 law, people whose property was expropriated by the Soviet Union have a right to claim compensation -- but only if they did not "lend considerable support" to the Nazi regime. > In a newspaper in 1932, the crown prince called for people to vote for Adolf Hitler in the presidential election, he added. Seems rather straightforward to me.

That doesn't seem quite so straightforward actually. The Nazi regime wasn't a thing yet, as the Nazis had yet to seize power. How obvious was it at the time to Germans that the Nazis would turn out to be so horrible?

It would have been obvious to anyone who actually read Mein Kampf.

Re: Last German kaiser's heirs fight for riches lost behind Iron Curtain

#14
post #6

> Under a 1994 law, people whose property was expropriated by the Soviet Union have a right to claim compensation -- but only if they did not "lend considerable support" to the Nazi regime. > In a newspaper in 1932, the crown prince called for people to vote for Adolf Hitler in the presidential election, he added. Seems rather straightforward to me.

Define "considerable". I'm just about certain that the lawyers are going to be arguing about whether that event crosses the threshold or not.

Re: Last German kaiser's heirs fight for riches lost behind Iron Curtain

#15
So Australia, Canada, and the US are going to be returned to their previous owners?

There is zero consistency in these kinds of claims because what is really happening is an influential family with plenty of resources for lawyers is going to grab a shipload of German taxpayer euros using tortured legal arguments.

Re: Last German kaiser's heirs fight for riches lost behind Iron Curtain

#16

>> Many critics have expressed anger that the Hohenzollerns are now trying to get these treasures back, depleting public collections. well, it's theirs after all.

It is not theirs and never was. There is no such thing as a “legitimate king.”

Not that I have much sympathy for those folks, but what does their (il)legitimacy as nobility have to do with their right to own property and possessions? There are solid arguments against their claims, but this isn't one of them.

Re: Last German kaiser's heirs fight for riches lost behind Iron Curtain

#18

>> Many critics have expressed anger that the Hohenzollerns are now trying to get these treasures back, depleting public collections. well, it's theirs after all.

It is not theirs and never was. There is no such thing as a “legitimate king.”

According to the article the property in question was legitimized as private property by German state after abdication. So after 1926 the formerly royal family were just rich normal citizens, and the legitimacy of their former royalty should not matter.

Re: Last German kaiser's heirs fight for riches lost behind Iron Curtain

#19

>> Many critics have expressed anger that the Hohenzollerns are now trying to get these treasures back, depleting public collections. well, it's theirs after all.

If it was, they should have cared about it earlier. Right after the borders opened...Now, after lots of stuff was reconstructed and supported with tax money, they come back....

Re: Last German kaiser's heirs fight for riches lost behind Iron Curtain

#20
The same claims are made around the world by people who no resources or prestige, sometimes they win things, sometimes they don't.

Examples include Palestinians, descendants of slaves in the US, Native Americans, indigenous peoples around the world.

Just about everybody has a history of their ancestors taking things in ways which weren't "legal" AND having things taken from them. It is hard to come up with a consistent moral and legal philosophy to deal with these kinds of things. Do I owe reparations to the British isles and Normandy because most of my ancestors were Vikings (or to myself because many of my ancestors would also have been victims)? Should I give the family farm back to the Native Americans who were kicked off the land? Does Rome still deserve much of Europe?

It's super difficult to determine these things, especially when the people who have had things taken from them are dead and maybe several generations back.

Post reply on HN