Victim theory

Victim theory (German: Opferthese) is a term that derives from contemporary history. It is commonly used to describe a manner of argumentation widely spread throughout Austria after World War II concerning the time period before the Anschluss (interdiction of the NSDAP, attempted coup of the NS in 1934, violences and riots of the NS in Austria, "Thousand-Mark-Blockade", etc.) respectively the role of Austria in the time of National Socialism. According to these manners of argumentation, the state of Austria was the first victim to fall prey to the aggressive foreign policy of the National Socialists. A synonym for victim theory is victim myth (corresponding to the terms of Habsburg Myth, Myth of the emperor, Myth of origins). Since the victim theory effectuated a suppressing of the fact of Austrian collaboration concerning the atrocities of the National Socialists, it is often declared to be the "Lie of Life" of the Second Austrian Republic.

Origin

The involuntary demise of Austria as an international legal personality was called upon as a legitimization for accepting the victimization of the country of Austria - standing in accord with the imprisonment of members of the Austrian government immediately after the invasion of German troops. Supporting this theory was a passage of the "Moscow Declaration" of November 1, 1943, in which the minister of foreign affairs of the United Kingdom, the United States of America and the Soviet Union claim that "Austria [was] the first free country that should fall prey to the typical aggressive policy of Hitler [and that it] should be liberated from German rule", and that the Annexation of 1938 should count as "invalid and futile".[1] As a consequence, the state of Austria was under constitutional law regarded as a victim of NS-policy.

The former went alongside a victimization of individuals after the end of World War II. In these cases, however, a differentiation between a "political victim" and a "war victim" was being made.

Effects and long-term consequences

Soon, the victim theory was being used in phrasings of the Declaration of Independence of April 27, 1945, in which it served Austria to part with the German Reich. The document counts as a founding document of the Second Republic. It states amongst others that "the Annexation in the year of 1938 was initiated through external military threats and through the highly treacherous terror of a Nazi-Fascist minority [...and that it] was forced upon the Austrian population, that had become helpless, through a military and belligerent occupation."[2]

The victim theory showed effects already in the postwar period: Denazification was carried out in the first postwar years - even stricter than in Germany - (Verbotsgesetz 1947). It was however practically ended in the course of the Cold War and therefore - from a retrospective point of view - did not take place to a satisfactory extent. Furthermore, the restitution of robbed property was being increasingly delayed.

Accordingly, the suppression of complicity of many Austrians with the atrocities committed during the NS-times was responsible for the slow progress on the reconciliation with the "political victims" of National Socialist persecution (Jews, Roma, and others). The "war victims", on the other hand, were treated differently. The fact that the "National Socialist Reichs-government of Adolf Hitler had led the people of Austria, that had been made powerless and weak-willed, in a senseless and hopeless war of conquest, which no Austrian had ever wanted"[3] made it easy to entitle members of the Wehrmacht as war victims. Declared as war victims were also members of the Waffen-SS that had joined after October 1, 1943, since membership was regarded obligatory starting from this date. In this case, the division of the "Third Camp" (Drittes Lager) in domestic policy between the two parties SPÖ and ÖVP was concerned to a large extent.

The victim theory was furthermore used by Austrian government members (which, being KZ-inmates, emigrants, etc., were all "really" persecuted ones) in negotiations over the Austrian State Treaty, so as to get rid of the idea of national complicity and to ward off the extensive claims of the USSR.

Through a consequent retention of the victim theory over several decades, the time of National Socialism was barely processed in Austria up to the early 1990s and the role of many Austrians as an offender barely perceived. Only since 1986, in the course of the Kurt Waldheim scandal and the "Remembrance Year" of 1988, did a sophisticated engagement with the NS-past take place. In this context, Franz Vranitzky, chancellor in the year of 1991, was the first official representative of Austria who confessed the crimes committed by Austrians and asked for forgiveness. Accordingly, the Wehrmachtsausstellung was discussed in a controversial manner, for it openly exhibited contents that had up to then stood under a strict taboo. This act of rethinking also facilitated the realization of the Austrian Holocaust Memorial Service, which had already been promoted by the political scientist Andreas Maislinger in the late 70s, through the Interior Minister (who is in charge of the Alternative civilian service) Franz Löschnak.

Only very late, that is in the year of 1998, and under massive international pressure - and especially due to complaints of the United States -, did Austria appoint a committee of historians of the Republic of Austria that should research and report on the deprivation of fortune from 1938 to 1945 as well as the restitutions and compensations after 1945. Many restitutions followed as a result of this research and these efforts.

In summary, the course of events under constitutional law of 1938 as to the Republic of Austria has to be regarded as a janus-faced act; and this only in conjunction with various and diverse interests during the Cold War. Whereas, observed from one perspective, the state Republic of Austria fell prey to NS-politics, from another perspective, citizens of the Republic of Austria were compliant actors when it came to the enforcement of NS-policies.

Finally, some journalists regarded the reactions to the so-called "EU sanctions" against Austria as the last manifestation of the victim theory so far (and this time with inverse prefixes):[4] When the at that time 14 other member countries of the EU opposed to a participation of the right-winged populistic FPÖ in the government that was being reassembled and when - after a nevertheless ensued coalition of ÖVP and FPÖ - diplomatic sanctions against this government were put into action, these steps were interpreted by political forces and the country's media as paternalistic "measures against Austria", and with that against the whole country.

See also

References

  1. ↑ cit. a. Ehtreiber 2007, keyword „Opferthese“.
  2. ↑ Acoustic document on www.staatsvertrag.de. Ed.: Technisches Museum Wien with Österreichischer Mediathek, accessed November 30, 2008.
  3. ↑ Acoustic document on www.staatsvertrag.at. Ed.: Technisches Museum Wien with Österreichischer Mediathek, accessed November 30, 2008.
  4. ↑ see e.g. Nina Horaczek „Echte Patrioten“ gegen „Österreich-Vernaderer“. In: Martin Strauß, Karl-Heinz Ströhle (Ed.): Sanktionen. 10 Jahre danach. Die Maßnahmen der Länder der Europäischen Union gegen die österreichische Regierung im Jahr 2000. Studienverlag, Innsbruck [a. o.] 2010, ISBN 978-3-7065-4823-6.

Further reading

External links

This article is issued from Wikipedia - version of the 11/7/2016. The text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share Alike but additional terms may apply for the media files.