Wielkopolskie Uprising 1919

Discussions on all aspects of Poland during the Second Polish Republic and the Second World War. Hosted by Piotr Kapuscinski.
User avatar
Peter H
Member
Posts: 28628
Joined: 30 Dec 2002 13:18
Location: Australia

Wielkopolskie Uprising 1919

Post by Peter H » 04 Jun 2004 07:35


User avatar
Peter H
Member
Posts: 28628
Joined: 30 Dec 2002 13:18
Location: Australia

Post by Peter H » 04 Jun 2004 07:38

Both Poles and Freikorps using similar uniforms must have been confusing:

Image
http://www.city.poznan.pl/powstanie/ilu ... /obr06.jpg

Image
http://komisja-historyczna.webpark.pl/i ... e/cb14.jpg

User avatar
Peter H
Member
Posts: 28628
Joined: 30 Dec 2002 13:18
Location: Australia

Post by Peter H » 04 Jun 2004 07:45


User avatar
Fredd
Member
Posts: 209
Joined: 24 Nov 2003 09:22
Location: Poland, Torun

Post by Fredd » 05 Jun 2004 08:31

Thanks excellent photos on the site you have mentioned.

Allow me to add that according to a treaty signed 16th January 1919 in Trewir Germany recognized the Army of Wielkopolska as a part of Ententa forces (of course did it under French pressure).

And something for our German friends who claim it was old German land :wink: map is dated about 1900.
Image

michael mills
Member
Posts: 8939
Joined: 11 Mar 2002 12:42
Location: Sydney, Australia

Post by michael mills » 19 Sep 2004 10:22

To bring some clarity into the issue:

It is not whether the newly resurrected Polish state had a justifiable claim to the transfer to it of the German Posen Province.

In my view it had a very good claim, given that the population of the province was overwhelmingly of Polish ethnicity and was very nationalist in outlook. Furthermore, the province had only belonged to Prussia from 1793 (Second Partition) to 1806, and again from 1815 onward.

But it needs to be remembered that Polish chauvinist organisations not only claimed Posen Province; they claimed all German territory east of the Oder-Neisse line, ie East and West Prussia, Pomerania, and Silesia. Some of the more extreme chauvinists wanted to seize German territory as far west as Berlin, as was pointed out in the book by Gunter Deschner quoted by me.

The issue is: who were the first to introduce illegal, terrorist violence into the ethnic conflict between Germans and Poles in the borderlands?

The answer is clear; it was Polish chauvinist organisations, which launched armed attacks on Germans in November 1918, after the German surrender, initially in Posen Province and then in other areas such as Silesia.

The reason for the Polish resort to illegal, terrorist violence is also clear. The Polish nationalists wanted to pre-empt the results of peace negotiations by wiping out the German administration in the eastern German territories and panicking the ethnic German population into flight.

The historical fact is that the Polish chauvinist organisations did not achieve their full aims. The German civilian population was for the greater part successfully defended by the German Freikorps, which were tacitly supported by Britain as a check to French ambitions.

As a result, the Polish illegal combatants did not succeed in their aim of ethnically cleansing the territory east of the Oder-Neisse line during the period of upheaval in the immediate aftermath of the war..

Furthermore, at the Paris Peace Conference in 1919 the Polish delegation, led by Dmowski and Paderewski, was unable to persuade the Major Allied and Associated Powers to grant the maximum Polish demands, ie all German territory east of the Oder-Neisse line. All Poland was able to get was Posen Province (to which it has a fully justified claim) and part of West Prussia (to which its claim was more questionable). Upper Silesia and south East Prussia were made subject to plebiscite.

Since the full demands of the Polish extremist nationalists had not been met, they again resorted to terrorist violence in Upper Silesia in three separate outbursts, hoping to force the German part of the population out. Again they were stopped by German Freikorps and parts of the Allied occupation forces.

szopen
Member
Posts: 814
Joined: 21 May 2004 15:31
Location: poznan, poland

Post by szopen » 19 Sep 2004 11:49

Micheal Mills, where are your sourceS?

The problem with you ist that what you are claiming is totally wrong from our perspective. In Silesia the Uprising was atsrted by German army shooting to workers striking in mines, and after beating Polish activists etc. In Posen area it's not possible to say who started, thoug most Polish books i've read are accusing Germans of shooting in direction of Bazaar which caused chaos and eruoption of violance.

Nevertheless, During fight Poles did not used policy of ethnic cleansing. I know of no serious organisation which would claimed territories up to Berlin. If you do, please quote who was them, when the claim was made and where.

Both Gdnaks Pomerania and Poznan area had Polish majority. You are trying to mimic Prussian policy of "divide and conquer" which was so succesful in Masruai (in 1850 all Masurs reported Polish language, 50 years laters almost all were reporting Masurian language) but the fact is that in elections to Reichstag and whatever most Kashubians was voting for Polish National List.

Anyway, what are you doing here is repeating the same "facts" (i am hesitating to calling them lies, before i will see your quotes) without giving any quotes. What organisations were mading claims, where, when and source would suffice for starters.

Second, what do you mean by violence? Please quote Polish first violence accident, place, source etc

Obserwator
Banned
Posts: 557
Joined: 01 Aug 2004 18:50
Location: Poland

Post by Obserwator » 19 Sep 2004 20:05

Some of the more extreme chauvinists wanted to seize German territory as far west as Berlin, as was pointed out in the book by Gunter Deschner quoted by me.
Untrue-you are stretching his words.Youor quote showed an example of Nazi justification of genocide. The accusation (like all nazi propaganda) isn't true and possibly comes from the fact that Poles in the past inhabited regions up to Berlin, and such topic was probably hated by Nazis.
who were the first to introduce illegal, terrorist violence into the ethnic conflict between Germans and Poles in the borderlands?
Oh and is there legal terrorist violence ?
I could of course start with Kulturkampf but I will just say that the first uprising was incited when polish miners were murdered at the hands of Grenzschutz
Poles back then went on strike to demand their rights and Grenzschutz dealt with them harshly resulting in the deaths of 10 Poles in Mysłowice mine.
http://solipiwo.webpark.pl/
the site deals with history of the place.

Second uprising started when German militia attacked Polish newspapers and bureaus of Polish activists during the days the Soviet army attacked Warsaw.

User avatar
boobazzz
Member
Posts: 103
Joined: 31 Aug 2004 21:50
Location: Warsaw, Poland

Post by boobazzz » 19 Sep 2004 23:21

szopen wrote:
Anyway, what are you doing here is repeating the same "facts" (i am hesitating to calling them lies, before i will see your quotes) without giving any quotes. What organisations were mading claims, where, when and source would suffice for starters.

Second, what do you mean by violence? Please quote Polish first violence accident, place, source etc
Szopen, this is useless, I asked this man exaclty same questions numerous times in this thread:

http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic. ... &start=180

with no success.

Nevertheless, today I came across D. Irving's website and quite incidentally found Michaels name among his supporters; (you can find the link in the thread mentionned) which makes me think that maybe he has a sort of intention to justify the nazi atrocities, which he actually did with the quotation provied (Heydrich biography).

Anyway, i know that moderator may kick my ass out from here for this, but - in the face of the lack moderator's response to Michael's mssing sources - finaly I think I found an answer to the question "why Michael lacks credible sources" on Polish terror; and I must admit I am quite happy for it as it will save me a lot of time by not egaging into dispute with him anymore. which I recommend to you folks too.

cheers
b.

Obserwator
Banned
Posts: 557
Joined: 01 Aug 2004 18:50
Location: Poland

Post by Obserwator » 20 Sep 2004 00:49

Nevertheless, today I came across D. Irving's website and quite incidentally found Michaels name among his supporters
Mills also claims :
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=56629
Thus, if Britain had agreed to make peace with Germany in 1940, the Madagascar Plan would have been implemented, and the Jews of the part of Europe dominated by Germany (ie west of the Soviet border) would have been resettled on the highlands of Madagascar, an area as pleasant as the highlands of Kenya.
No comment.

User avatar
Peter H
Member
Posts: 28628
Joined: 30 Dec 2002 13:18
Location: Australia

Post by Peter H » 20 Sep 2004 00:56

Mr Mills association's elsewhere are irrelevant to the topic being discussed.

Refer forum guidelines:
There has been a lot of stimulating information exchanged on this forum, and some excellent discussions of controversial points. With few exceptions, the participants are thoughtful, serious people. If you find an argument is flawed, point out the flaws and the evidence to the contrary, and leave it at that. There is no need to resort to insults which do not prove your point. If you disagree with a contributor, please use your energy to show why his argument is mistaken. This will improve both the tone and quality of our discussions.
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=53962

User avatar
boobazzz
Member
Posts: 103
Joined: 31 Aug 2004 21:50
Location: Warsaw, Poland

Post by boobazzz » 20 Sep 2004 02:22

Peter H wrote:Mr Mills association's elsewhere are irrelevant to the topic being discussed.

Refer forum guidelines:
There has been a lot of stimulating information exchanged on this forum, and some excellent discussions of controversial points. With few exceptions, the participants are thoughtful, serious people. If you find an argument is flawed, point out the flaws and the evidence to the contrary, and leave it at that. There is no need to resort to insults which do not prove your point. If you disagree with a contributor, please use your energy to show why his argument is mistaken. This will improve both the tone and quality of our discussions.
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=53962
Peter, I would be very happy to follow this rule if Michael would have shown us some evidence of his 'controvercial' claims, so I could 'use my energy to show why his argument is mistaken' with some couter ones. In fact all we have here are continued claims of existance of some aldeged Polish terorist organisations or chauvinist ones, or extreme nationalist ones, while Mr. Mills is not able to provide us with even smallest proofs for that. How can we discuss such arguments? Why don't we cite forum rules that demand participants to provide reliable sources?Is this in compliance with those rules?

Besides, I do not see any inslut in the information given, moreover I used it to prove my point that Mr. Mills does not seem to be much realible as a researcher and there are strong circumstances to claim that his motivation is different that those of scientific character.

Motivation that lets himslef call Poles terrorists with no proof for that.

Too bad, that the forum rules seem to be respected selectively here, it is truly discouraging.

regards,
b.

michael mills
Member
Posts: 8939
Joined: 11 Mar 2002 12:42
Location: Sydney, Australia

Post by michael mills » 20 Sep 2004 03:06

To Obserwator and Szopen:

It would help if you stated exactly what statements of mine you are objecting to.

For example, on the one hand you seem not to like my statement that Poles were the first to introduce illegal armed violence into the ethnic conflict between Germans and Poles in the eastern German territories, but on the other you quite proudly proclaim that in December 1918 organised groups of armed Polish nationalists took up arms and launched attacks on agencies of the German administration of Posen Province, which at that time was under international law a component part of the German Reich.

With your own words you have confirmed my statement, that Polish armed rebels introduced illegal armed violence to the ethnic conflict which until then had been waged by peaceful, legal means.

It would also help if you would provide English translations of the relevant parts of the websites you have linked in support of your arguments.

As to the claims made by the Polish delegation at the Paris Peace Conference in 1919, I suggest you read any standard history of that conference. I suggest you also read about Roman Dmowski and his ideology.

User avatar
Peter H
Member
Posts: 28628
Joined: 30 Dec 2002 13:18
Location: Australia

Post by Peter H » 20 Sep 2004 09:51

boobazzz wrote:
Peter H wrote:Mr Mills association's elsewhere are irrelevant to the topic being discussed.

Refer forum guidelines:
There has been a lot of stimulating information exchanged on this forum, and some excellent discussions of controversial points. With few exceptions, the participants are thoughtful, serious people. If you find an argument is flawed, point out the flaws and the evidence to the contrary, and leave it at that. There is no need to resort to insults which do not prove your point. If you disagree with a contributor, please use your energy to show why his argument is mistaken. This will improve both the tone and quality of our discussions.
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=53962
Peter, I would be very happy to follow this rule if Michael would have shown us some evidence of his 'controvercial' claims, so I could 'use my energy to show why his argument is mistaken' with some couter ones. In fact all we have here are continued claims of existance of some aldeged Polish terorist organisations or chauvinist ones, or extreme nationalist ones, while Mr. Mills is not able to provide us with even smallest proofs for that. How can we discuss such arguments? Why don't we cite forum rules that demand participants to provide reliable sources?Is this in compliance with those rules?

Besides, I do not see any inslut in the information given, moreover I used it to prove my point that Mr. Mills does not seem to be much realible as a researcher and there are strong circumstances to claim that his motivation is different that those of scientific character.

Motivation that lets himslef call Poles terrorists with no proof for that.

Too bad, that the forum rules seem to be respected selectively here, it is truly discouraging.

regards,
b.
B.
We are not a Star Chamber here and do not endorse guilt by association .I'm certainly sure readers of this topic can themselves judge the validity of equating the Polish POW movement with 'terrorism'.All moderators here try to promote impartiality however controversial a view(or in your opinion disrespectful of a nationalist movement).As long as forum guidelines are not breached so be it.

Peter

Obserwator
Banned
Posts: 557
Joined: 01 Aug 2004 18:50
Location: Poland

Post by Obserwator » 20 Sep 2004 12:59

With your own words you have confirmed my statement, that Polish armed rebels introduced illegal armed violence to the ethnic conflict which until then had been waged by peaceful, legal means.
Was partition of Poland legal ? Were laws enforcing injust treatment of Poles(taking land from Poles by force,forbiding to speak Polish etc) legal ? Were shootings of Polish civilians on strike by Grenzschutz legal ? Were murderes of Polish activists by German militas legal ?
As to the issue of legality-that's absurd. Soon we will learn that concentration camps were legal because they didn't violate Reich's law.
That's not an argument.

szopen
Member
Posts: 814
Joined: 21 May 2004 15:31
Location: poznan, poland

Post by szopen » 21 Sep 2004 08:16

michael mills wrote:To Obserwator and Szopen:
For example, on the one hand you seem not to like my statement that Poles were the first to introduce illegal armed violence into the ethnic conflict between Germans and Poles in the eastern German territories, but on the other you quite proudly proclaim that in December 1918 organised groups of armed Polish nationalists took up arms and launched attacks on agencies of the German administration of Posen Province, which at that time was under international law a component part of the German Reich.
You have not read carefully our post.

To this day, nobody knows WHO started shooting in Poznan. Therefore, you can't say it was Poles who introduced violence. The first shots were IMHO in the neighbourhood of "Bazaar", Polish institution, and Polish authors were quick to assume that the shooters were Germans. However, it is simple impossible to say, since there are no reliable witnesses confirming WHO SHOT FIRST. The shots were heard, and the reactions to them is known, but as such you can't say that Poles first introduced violence.

Second, Polish national comitet was founded initially legally or at least semi-legally. It took command over uprising after it's broke, and was NOT initiator of uprising (and was initially not very enthusiastic about that, for that matter).

In addition, may i assume that you are admitting that Poles were not treated fairly in pre-War Germany? By state and by institutions tied to state?

Return to “Poland 1919-1945”