This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors |
The other problems of this article aside, here is a quite obvious mistake:
Hans Grimm (1875-1959) was NOT the brother of Jacob Grimm (1785–1863), that one lived a hundred years earlier. They may not even be directly related, at least I couldn't find anything that says so. Also, it is misleading to mention Jacob, an academic, linguist, cultural researcher and one of the famous brothers Grimm at this position. Yes, he was a proponent of pan-germanism, but under different auspices in a different time. Especially as the sentence says "preached" (negative and intensive connotation), I don't think his name and work belongs in a line with the aforementioned people. Particularly not at the end of it, because he came long before them. Either one should find a different spot to bring his name up in the article, or maybe should not mention him at all.MegaChaosGelee (talk) 19:23, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
I removed the name and link to Constantin Frantz as it cannot be proven by primary sources, that he supported pan-german nationalism. His intention was the founding of a Central European federation, including a restored Poland. The former german principalities would have been only members among others and not the base for political hegemony or cultural germanization. For further information take a look into his work "Die Weltpolitik unter besonderer Bezugnahme auf Deutschland" (1882). Though Frantz is often mentioned by later authors in relation to the pangerman movement, this derives mostly from abusive quotation of Frantz by german nationalists after Worldwar I. Currently, I am trying to revise the article in the German Wikipedia, but several questions will remain tasks for further research.--Christophmahler (talk) 07:51, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
If you say "Pan-germanism" is "Alldeutsch" then the colors would be black-white-red, not black-red-gold, and austria's Freedom party has nothing to do with pan-germanism....Alldeutsche and Großdeutsche are rivals....while Alldeutsche were for uniting all "germans" under prussia, the Großdeutschen were for uniting all germans under Austria....thats a BIG difference! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.178.186.152 (talk) 01:10, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
Nothing about Pan-German League and its interesting program ? Will have to expand. --Molobo 12:52, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
A bit on Pan-German League ideas: [1] We need a free press for our national life, a press of and for Germans, one that expresses the German spirit I shall suggest concerning the distancing of Jewry from our public life will be sufficient to preserve the health of our press system Let us be clear in the discussion of these necessities that the innocent must suffer along with the guilty.... Today, the borders must be totally and unconditionally barred to any further Jewish immigration. This is absolutely necessary, but no longer sufficient. Just as self-evident, foreign Jews who have not yet acquired citizenship rights must be speedily and unconditionally expelled, to the last man. But this also is not enough....We must demand that resident Jews be placed under an Aliens' Law.... Newspapers which have Jewish collaborators must make this fact known. The others, which we generally call "German" newspapers, may neither be owned by Jews nor have Jewish editors or reporters. Banks that are not purely personal enterprises may not have Jewish directors. In future, rural property may not be owned by Jews or be mortgaged to Jews. As compensation for the protection Jews enjoy as foreigners, they shall pay double the taxes of Germans....
Resolutely militant policy against the Poles through application of expropriation and introduction of a prohibition against parcellization of land....Extension of military law to all regions endangered by Polish assault. Especially for Upper Silesia we must demand that those elected by the Polish people can sit in parliament only as advisors; they therefore should have no vote and are to be heard only on those matters of interest to their fellow nationals or homeland. Should it turn out that these determinations are avoided by mergers with other parties, we should not shrink from the further step of finally withdrawing the active and passive franchise from Poles. The definition of a Pole should be established on the same basis as suggested for Jews, naturally with language as the determining factor.
Under all conditions Polish newspapers and periodicals must include a German translation next to the Polish text. German will be the only tolerated language for any assembly....
However, there must be created a Central Office in which everything concerning the Polish question is deliberated upon. Only after an Ostmark[3] ministry [has been created] in which the practical struggles of the Polish question are worked out by experts, guaranteeing uniformity of direction, will, and execution of policy, can we expect a lasting success. Should it come to the stage of Polish resistance with recourse to means thus far avoided, the state should not shrink from the ultimate.
As can be seen the Pan-German program represented by Pan-German League was motivated by anti-semitism and discrimination of Poles. It alledged that "German spirit" was harmed by Jews and Poles and wanted to discriminate those nationalitites. Such information should be included into the main text along with quotes. --Molobo 14:42, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
Where are the citations in this article?74.138.89.115 19:07, 22 April 2007 (UTC) heather
I do not know much about "Pan-Germanism," but based off the article, it seems like Hitler's Anschluss and Greater Germany should at least be mentioned. The only mention of World War II is germans being treated badly in the Soviet Union. That seems to ignore some very blatant events... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.148.20.111 (talk) 16:40, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
To say that geopgraphical reasons and mixed areas where the onlyreason why the German speaking people of Austria couldn't live in a German speaking country after WWI. Especially in South Tyrol and in the border region between Austria and Czechoslovakia closed predominatly German speaking territories stretched well into what became Chechoslovakia and Italy. The poeple living in the region were not asked (with two exeptions, and those referendums might have been rigged) in what country they wanted to live and this was done purely for political reasons, namely to fullfill promises to the Czechs and Italians and to weaken the german speaking countries. This was quite contradictionary to what had been promised in Wilson's 14 points and was on of the most important political topics of the time. As it stands the article has to be seen as anti-German (or anti-Austrian, your choice) propaganda and is misleading. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.67.177.11 (talk) 11:25, August 27, 2007 (UTC)
Yes, a reference to Nazism should be put in the article. But drawing a straight line from the Pan-German League is somewhat misleading. --91.96.195.148 22:18, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
The article says:
I suppose it depends on what you mean by "clings to Pan-Germanism", but some variety of pan-Germanist sentiment has been present, especially through the 1970s and 1980s, in most of the major Austrian parties, including the left-wing ones, especially in more conservative regions. For example, the SPÖ governor of Carinthia, Leopold Wagner (1974–1988), was rather controversial in his party for his populist overtones and non-apologetic mentions of his time in the Hitler Youth. --Delirium (talk) 18:54, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
I can't believe this article has been here this long without reference to Herder, Fichte, or Hegel. Ehusman (talk) 04:16, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
Given the fact that Germany is a democratic federation I don´t find any reason why not just Austria, but Switzerland, Luxembourg, Flanders and The Netherlands couldn´t become member states of that democratic Federation if they decide so. In fact, I think that is a necessary outcome if we want Europe to have a say in the World stage. The result of Austria, Switerland, Luxembourg, Flanders and The Netherlands becoming Landern of the Federation of Germany would be a nation of 120 million people, with a GDP of $5,4 Tr. and an strong industrial base.--81.32.121.105 (talk) 04:35, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
Having lived in the Netherlands for many years I can assure you that any notion of that country choosing to become a German laender is pie in the sky. Germany is probably the most despised nation for most Dutchmen for obvious reason. (I'm not Dutch btw.) 1812ahill (talk) 12:34, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
User 1812Ahill, you are a buffoon. Maybe you should state your "Obvious" reason before speaking. Seeing as you are not a dutchman, surely you have no damn clue. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.192.74.130 (talk) 20:03, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Yes but a true Austrian knows he is ethnically German. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.238.185.104 (talk) 10:43, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
This is not a forum please discuss outside, thanks. By the way avoid personal statements next time. 190.195.112.29 (talk) 08:12, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
It's not personal at all it is the truth, holy roman empire of the german nation, german confederation, german austria, anschluss and this article itself proves it —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.238.185.104 (talk) 13:37, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
Is there any documentation of Pan-Germanism as modern movement in the US? I know it has become taboo, and perhaps underground in Germany, but the idea is still present in the US; especially among German descendants and Social Darwinist youth cultures. Also, I would imagine Neo-Nazis are also Pan-Germanists. --IronMaidenRocks (talk) 19:31, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
The article completely misses information on racism aspect of Pan-Germanism, calls on depopulate Slavic territories and influences it had on Nazism.--MyMoloboaccount (talk) 10:47, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
"Kristoffer Brun og andre store folkeførere på 1800-tallet, forfekta de samme ideene, de pan-germanske ideene. Og Knut Hamsun slutta seg 100 prosent til de ideene. "[2]
References
Ibsen did not support pangermanism - the (not very reliablke) source you provide suggest he supported it partially. In fact as as I have shown he published against Bjoernsson's pangermanism.·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 20:18, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
The current map (as of April 2015) shows a map of the situation in 1937, according to its information. It also shows Danish as a spoken language in parts of East Prussia, bright green colour. These facts makes the map a bit unreliable, perhaps it contains other errors as well ? Haven't we got a better, more reliable map ? Boeing720 (talk) 12:15, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
I think what the map is trying to show there is the Polish minority in East Prussia. Missaeagle (talk) 21:33, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
Also the Elsass-Lothringen area appear to be wrong, not all French speaking people left this area after the Franco-Prussian war 1970-71 (Alsace-Lorraine in French). Likewise there were German speaking people north of the German-Denmark border, as well as Danish speaking people lining south of the border. Still today Flensburg has around 5.000 people who are native Danish speaking. Boeing720 (talk) 12:24, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
Luxembourg, Hungary, Székely Land, Alsace-Lorraine, and Western Poland all seem to have a much greater German presence in this map than they really did, this map implies that Luxembourg is completely ethnically German, which is simply factually incorrect. Darknight1342 (talk) 18:08, 11 January 2020 (UTC)
The German term "Pangermanismus" refers much more accurately to Pan-Germanicism, not Pan-Germanism. This is because the term German in the German language refers to Germanic things only. English is absurdly confusing here, but it suffices to say that in the German language only Deutsch refers to Germans while Germanen refers to Germanics. Thus, stating that it only sought to unite the German-speaking people would not cover the whole aspect of it. Bataaf van Oranje (Prinsgezinde) (talk) 18:55, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
The article talks about Frisian. The respective articles are West Frisian language and Frisian languages.Hence the wording Frisian should be removed. Sarcelles (talk) 08:12, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
The map "German Map Sudeten.PNG" is quite obviously not from 1938, as it accurately depicts the months in which various conquests took place and a map of occupied Europe from the height of Nazi expansion. Moreover, the map rather strangely includes the date 1948. The fact that it is claimed to have been published in a left-wing British publication makes the whole thing rather dubious. It should be removed.2601:85:C202:150:E1CA:5128:1B18:B50E (talk) 21:57, 20 January 2018 (UTC)