The Germans were land-locked, had their eyes out of necessity always on their neighbors. They had to be aware of other cultures on their doorsteps and not always friendly, not by a long shot. It is open to discussion who started the troubles, what was first, the hen or the egg - romantic (Italian, French) and slavonic (Russia). The Germans became less tolerant and because they were running in circles in their own culture, became convinced of their own superiority-Nurnberg Ring, Tristan & Isolde, Sigried, Lohingrin, Wagner, Wodan, Deutschland uber alles, it all started with King Frederick of Prussia, the flute playing King, who made a military state of Prussia and to keep his subjects under control what's the first to start a civil service. Bismarck finished the job. It might be interesting to know that the original of health insurance, Medicare and such was started in Germany by Bismarck, Krankenkasse, round 1880's.
But again nobody can deny that while the Dutch contributed Erasmus, Grotius, Leeghwater, Huygens, Rembrandt, Hals, Vemeer,ect. To culture, the Italians came up with Verdi, Leoncavallo, Puccini, Leonardo da Vinci and Galileo to name a few , the French produced Bizet, Saint Seans , Debussy, Victor Hugo among others , the Russians Tchaikovsky, Mussourgsky, Rimsky-Korsakov, Strawinsky, Rachmaninoff and chopin, Mozart, Dvorak, Delibes still floating around, from the Germans came Beethoven, Schubert, Schumann, Schiller, Nietzsche, Schopenhauer, Heine, Mendelsohn, Wagner, ect., ect.
Yes a lot of European culture came from Mid-Europe, German territory.
As for the acknowledgments of the achievements of the Nederland's, first syrop and then the ties with England. This was the purpose of this tirade. Spite that the Dutch did not call on the Germans for protection. Why should they ask for protection from a country that started three wars in a century. Why should they tie their Fortune to a country that chose as their leader a house painter who was responsible for the bible of national-socialism "Mein Kampf", a country that murdered their whole Jewish population and then rejected all responsibility with: "Wir haben es nicht gewusst" we didn't know,The biggest lie of all. The Dutch were not all that crazy about the British either, do not forget helping other states was as its principal motivator self-interest. it is not a pretty picture but International politics is never pretty. all in all, it was clever reasoning, England as the devil and Germany as the savior.
What is wrong with that orientation, what price for peace? or should we prefer bombs and genocide above peaceful means. It says something about the militaristic attitude of the Germans, a label they had carried all along.
And then he carries on about the shortcomings, the weaknesses and mixes it with bits of praise. We are not very fond of setting our problems with war. We prefer cultural achievements art, science, religion, human relations but not in the letting go of the animal instincts of the Neanderthaler, the reptile. so much for Germany. And we are not Germans. Dutch Mr.Seyss and that is something different. And 12 million not 9 million
He does not talk of the paratroopers who attacked in the back and disrupted communications. This is another example of the arrogance of the " Herrenmenschen". the superior Ariers. For years they had prepared themselves for war, not peace. And now they ridicule their victims because they believed in peace.
And as for his not wanting to raise bitter memories, he did just that and not in some Dutchman but in 95% of them, resulting in a situation in the last year of the war, they couldn't handle anymore and they lost the last trace of civility and humanity.
I do not know where the little Seyss got his information about the Dutch idylle; one cannot expect an Austrian, landlocked, would know all these things. He should know better because of all that the Dutch did for the children of Austria after WW I. Anyhow a speech like this is not really the sure way to make friends, get their cooperation. And so it turned out and in the end Seyss Inquart had to face the hangman, the executioner.
Since when was WW I a liberation war? All the wars mentioned here were to conquer not to liberate.
And reading about that liberal-democratic system that suppressed with all violent means the nice national-socialistic parties, I get tears in my eyes, those dirty liberals and criminal socialist who never killed a Jew, never burned a book, did not have concentration camps, never started a war and above all were democratic, not fascists. how deep can you sink. Like the rest of the world with exception of Austria and Tsecho-Slovakia which had no say in this because they were overrun and Italy of Mussolini and Spain of Franco.
And than the man went out of his way to load praise and insult on our heads. Yes, those Dutchmen were lazy, sleepy morons compared with the superb Germans. I wonder what else will come out of the mouth of this fylosefer. I lived in Holland. read the newspapers. listened to the radio, but never ever saw the hate of the will to destroy, but certainly we kept our distance from the Hitler crowd and that didn't sit well with the pure bred Ariers-their own words.
We did not have the right of our own opinion and the way Seyss-inquart reacted is a measure of the civility one could expect from him. May be you get the idea that I am still possessed by the events that happened in those war years, than be aware that these things came from the Germans, all the dead in the camps, the firing-squads many times because of simply being a Jew.
The mortal conspiracies against the beloved Fuhrer must have gotten under the skin of Germany. In November 1939 the Dutch government was warned for an impending invasion by the brother of Prince Bernhard, the consort of the future Queen Juliana. Would it then be so strange that the Dutch government had contact with the British who already were at war with Germany, to talk about what to do in case this threat was materialized. Why were we not allowed to plan for our safety when the German were again planning a war and pulling people in it who had nothing to do with their beefs, showing no respect for the rights of others. Double talk
And than the Germans really got into day-dreaming, Talking about the liberty of political decisions given to the Dutch, it really meant. Europe dominated by the Germans all other people in some for their slaves. Is it any wonder that with the exception of a large part of the Italians, nobody believes in this. As Seyss said take it or leave it and the vast majority of the Europeans did not take it. Everybody in Europe understood and that's why Germanic Europe never came of the ground, was a fata morgana, a pie in the sky
And than we heard about the German view of how the Dutch reacted. Everything was fine as long as they are not against the Germans and their wonderful un-democratic system, the Germans who overran the country and whatever they may think, took the liberty away from us. And after the syrop the threat. Do you want more proof that national-socialism was not democratic, that it was no better than the old medieval despotism.
Convincing the Dutch compatriot of the correctness of the political ideas of national-socialism was really another of the examples of wishful thinking on the part of the Germans and it remained wishful thinking till the end. The nazzi's never made a dent in the convictions of the Dutch. This is just as much a token of the Dutch character as it was an indication of the inherent failure of national-socialism. That does not mean that there were no good ideas in national-socialism, but they had more to do with practical aspects, common sense, the inborn appreciation by the German people for order and less with ideology. No wonder that, just as after 1815 Napoleon disappeared from the stage, he left some excellent Napeleontic ideas behind which were incorporated in the government system, we did in 1945 with some of the outstanding German ideas,but again, that had nothing to do with national-socialism,
Insuring the stability for the food supplies, special for the working-man shows very clever thinking but one goes far to ensure that one's family will not starve. Behind this rethoric is a sinister threat but the Germans never realized what an independent, recalcitrant, stubborn creature the Dutch farmer was. A large part of the food supply was underground. They forgot that practically all farmers belonged either to the Roman Catholic church and were anti-German, notwithstanding to attitude of the pope/der Stellvertreter, and the Protestant of the ultra-conservative version, Calvinists, who had the whole Old Testament to find an appropriate devil to compare with Hitler and consorts.
And of course, who else is to blame for food shortages. That perfidious England, daring to blockade Germans. That we Germans could not do it was a pity so we sank passenger ships without warning. We tried a blockade when we attacked the convoys who brought weapons and troops over the Atlantic, but that is not the same as a food blockade. Too bad we did not succeed.
Of course the people stocked up before the Germans could confiscate the cattle for export to Germany.
And now Sayss Inquart started to polish the unions and the working people. From his words one would get the impression that the Dutch society was one that exploited the labour force for its own purposes. Notning could be further from the truth, the labor laws were too strict and the labor unions were too powerfull for that and too well-informed and there was nothing that the Germans could teach them. And certainly not after the Germans, as mentioned before, outlawed their own unions. I should know because before and during the war I was the representative for the company in the dealings with the unions and during the war I was a member of the labor council for the textile industry. I never saw a trace of exploitation. But this is the type of propaganda of which Joseph Gobbels was the inventor.
The next paragraph gives the answer to this riddle.
Talking about the increase in employment he says that 118.000 Dutchmen found work in Germany. What he really means but does not dare to say is that work is found by the Germans for them. This is another example of how the minds of Hitler, Goebbels, Goering, Himmler, Franck, Rosenberg and also Seyss Inquart worked. People were forced to work in Germany in the war industries on the points of those benign, innocent German bayonets ,add to these the Jews who were exterminated and later the people who were forced to work on the Atlantic Wall, the fortifications and defense against the nightmare of Hitler-invasion. Taking all that into account, the reduction of the unemployed was not such a miracle, let alone a German wonder. And the Germans knew all that, read the next paragraph.
No wonder, they lived far away from home, in camps. There was not much need for police "protection"
As the British and Americans had the audacity to bomb all factories working for the Germans in general and the German war machine in particular, several Dutch factories were forced to produce for the Germans and indeed were bombed, in this way lessening the bomb-load falling on Germany. I had a personal experience with that.
And now the frame of mind after May 10, 1940, particularly of those against all propaganda. Germans believed in a victory of the Allies. And the Germans, they still dreamt about a crushed England. Hitler who promised the heaven after the war and Churchil promised blood and tears during the war. They forgot or closed their eyes for it, that behind England stood the USA, first unofficial but later with all its power. I still remember the remark of a German soldier in December 1941 after Pearl Harbor and after Hitler declared war on the USA: "We have lost the war which we couldn't win anyhow; we didn't rule the waves". What follow now is a piece of stupid German arrogance.
As you have noticed jews and jewish are in lower case letters as was in the original script. The Germans seem to forget that they are not the judges to decide who belongs to a certain people; the Dutch were and have been for four centuries quite capable of deciding that for themselves. But the Germans went even further, they considered the Jews not as human beings but untouchables who are to be slaughtered. Well the Jews may be the enemies, but nihilism is a German invention-Nietschze, Schoppenhauer, Karl Marx contributed to it.
After reading the cloak and dagger story about Jews thrusting daggers in the backs of the German soldiers, after reading this 1 ament, the tears came in my eyes, I cried for the lousy treatment of the poor Germans. those uniform adoring people who had an absolute clear conscience, no wars, no killings, no gas chambers, no concentration camps. I also cried about the stupidity of Seyss Inquart to think that we would take that self-serving hot air. Than he really showed his colors when he talked about belting the Jews wherever he found them, promising those who helped the Jews forever hell. And because the Fuhrer said that the roll of the Jews was finished in Europe, many Dutch were prepared to bear the consequences in the German camps.
And than Seyss digs into Dutch history when he talks about William the Silent. This part asks for some commentary. But first William of Orange and William the Silent are the same historical figure in Dutch history; another name for him is "Father of the Fatherland", the man who led the seven provincies of the Netherlands in the beginning (1568) of the "80-years" lasting war against Spain and he was the first member of the Orange family who have since until the day of today been connected with the leadership of my country. A long line from William the Silent and via Maurits, Frederik Hendrik, Willem II, William III (who also was King of England-the William and Mary period), William IV, William V and after the Napoleontic time King William I, II and III, Wilhelmina, Juliana and now Beatrix. Seyss Inquart babbles over the tolerance of the first William but where is his tolerance with the Jews. Where did he get the notion that the first William was intolerant against the jews; the intolerance came from the Spaniards. from Ferdinand and Isabella, Philips I, II and III, from the Catholic hierarchy. Oh yes, not all Jews were nice people. They had their share of misfits just as every other race, the Germanic race included. In every bin with apples there will be one or a couple rotten apples. If you think that this is a justification to throw the whole bin overboard, than you are no better than the nazzi's. The whole lament of Seys is a sorry demonstration of intolerance, arrogance, jealousy. Well, fate closed the books on nazzi's. Hitler and friends and hopefully the Germans finally learned their lesson. But not the human race, they carried on where the Germans left off.