Book Read Free

Germany's Black Holocaust: 1890-1945

Page 11

by Carr, Firpo


  In fact, there was a law against “mixed marriages” even in Namibia, decades before Blacks and Whites were forbidden to marry in Nazi Germany, or some American southern states.

  Why? Well, according to Fischer, there would be “fatal genetic dangers” to any children produced from the “unholy” union since Blacks were so inferior to Whites. Says Simms:

  Doctor Eugen Fischer…developed his racial theories in German South West Africa (now Namibia) long before World War I. In Namibia, Fischer claimed there were genetic dangers arising from race mixing between German colonists and African women.[150]

  Fischer grossly misused his medical training to further his racist policies. Of course, this was to the detriment of scores of innocent African men, women, and children. Sadly, history’s reticence on the matter adds a further sting to the harsh reality of it all.

  Some will argue that there were no specific laws detailing what should be done with Blacks or the biracial offspring of the Black African father and White German mother. Even if such were the case, this absence did not prevent the humiliating sterilization program from taking place.

  There were no laws on the books specifying actions against blacks, but the Nazis set up a secret group, Commission Number 3, whose mission was to arrange for the sterilization of the so-called Rhineland Bastards. In 1937, local authorities were asked to submit documents on all known persons in this insulting category.

  The action was taken under the “Law for the Prevention of Offspring with Hereditary Defects” issued in 1933.

  Three commissions were to certify which children were “Rhineland Bastards.” Anthropologists from universities served as advisors to these three-member commissions. Professor Eugen Fischer of the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute was among them. Children were removed from homes and schools or picked up off the street and taken before the commission. They had no representation. Once the decision was handed down, the children were taken directly to the hospital and sterilized. Approximately four hundred were sterilized.[151]

  Was it just sterilization that was to take place? Not according to sources who were alive at the time and uncomfortably close to the unfortunate procedure that would sentence these helpless victims to a life of childlessness.

  Furthermore, yet another scenario was secretly unfolding behind the scenes. A wicked, unspeakable evil that plagues the minds of those who survived it down to this day.

  What was this evil? It was Hitler’s Final Solution for the “Rhineland Bastards.” After contemplating the utter disgust in his book, Hans J. Massaquoi adds the following commentary:

  Hitler’s malevolent plan to sterilize, then murder mixed-race children in the “liberated” Rhineland was far too close for comfort.[152]

  Hans Hauck, a Black Holocaust survivor and a victim of Hitler’s sterilisation programme, reveals on the film [Hitler’s Forgotten Victims] that “We were lucky that we weren’t victims of euthanasia—we were only sterilised. We had no anesthetic. Once I got my vasectomy certificate, we had to sign an agreement that we were not allowed to have sexual relations whatsoever with Germans.”[153] [Emphasis supplied.]

  Not until long after the war did I learn that a small number of black Germans—the tragic so-called “Rhineland bastards” fathered by World War I French and Belgian colonial occupation troops—were exterminated in Hitler’s death camps.[154] [Emphasis supplied.]

  The first of the three sources above allege that the “Rhineland Bastards” were both sterilized and murdered in concentration camps. The second source says that they were sterilized, albeit without an anesthetic, but allowed to live.

  Finally, the third source states with no uncertainty that the “Rhineland Bastards” were indeed liquidated in the “death camps.” It could have been a combination of all of the above.

  Mass murder of infants and children still did not stop the proliferation of “mixed-race” children. They were around before Hitler came to power; existed while he was in power; and, continued even after his foreseeable and actual demise.

  Infants and children who arrive on the scene after his demise, however, were not saddled with the offensive term “Rhineland Bastards.” They were given a new designation, although it is not clear by whom. This new classification was more descriptive than it was debasing—or was it?

  “Brown Babies”—the Next Generation

  of “Rhineland Bastards”?

  Who exactly are these so-called “brown babies”? They are the “mixed-race” offspring of World War II African American soldiers (or military personnel) and White German women. “They’re the same as the ones Hitler called ‘Rhineland Bastards,’ right?”

  Essentially, yes, but for a different time period. In other words, “brown babies,” like the so-called “Rhineland Bastards,” are of Black and White “mixed-race” origin. The difference between the two is the time in which they were born. It is a generational difference.

  The fathers of the “Rhineland Bastards” were, as we have discussed in detail already, Afro-French soldiers from French colonies in Africa. These soldiers were in Germany just after World War I and fathered children at that time.

  African American soldiers who fought in Germany during World War II, as noted above, fathered the so-called “brown babies” when they liaised with Germany women.

  Thankfully, Han J. Massaquoi, yet again, provides further insight in the matter:

  As a black person born in Germany, the most interesting group of Germans to me was the country’s burgeoning population of thousands of so-called “brown babies,” mostly illegitimate offspring of black GIs and German women. With U.S. occupation troops firmly entrenched in the country, “that old black magic” kept frauleins in a perpetual spin, with the result that brown babies kept a’ coming. West German authorities, for the most part, insisted that they kept no records regarding race and that all persons born in Germany were absolutely equal under the law. American authorities washed their hands altogether of illegitimate children fathered by U.S. occupation troops, since they were German citizens.[155]

  This provides us with nice background information on the brown babies. However, such information poses at least two questions that should probably be entertained: (1) How exactly were (or, are) these brown babies treated? and, (2) Were (or, are) they at any time in their lives discriminated against?

  The mixed answer to these questions below provides interesting food for thought.

  Another unfortunate circumstance is the class-consciousness of Germans. Too often in Germany you stay in the class in which you were born. Brown babies, therefore, even apart from their color, are automatically a part of the lower class.

  This, in a nutshell, is the problem of many of the brown babies. But it isn’t a matter of race, because any child in Germany who is born poor and illegitimate faces the same problems. In general, the children are accepted as individuals. I would say without hesitation that Negro children of comparable backgrounds in the United States don’t come near the degree of social acceptance which the children enjoy here.[156]

  It is a sad state of affairs when “brown babies” or “Negro children” are mistreated by being victimized by racism and discrimination in Germany, but are consoled with the thought that their counterparts across the ocean are worse off. The lesser of two evils is still just that—evil.

  Perhaps even sadder is the fact that since the above observations where made by Massaquoi, he has had a change of heart. Reality struck like a lightening bolt and pulverized his unrealistic perception of the situation.

  The result? He promptly revised his former optimistic position. Note what he now says:

  Unfortunately, since I made those observations back in 1966, times have changed again. Subsequent developments on Germany’s racial front, characterized by the alarming rise in the hate crimes and the proliferation of a variety of neo-Nazi groups with racist agendas, have rendered my optimistic sentiments woefully obsolete.

  While it would be an exaggeration to say that, racially s
peaking, Germany is back at square one, the sad fact remains that racism is far from a thing of the past. My encounter in 1997 with about one hundred young German-born black people from a wide spectrum of educational, social, and economic backgrounds, all members of the ISD (Initiative Black Germans), has convinced me that much work still needs to be done—by the German federal government and the private sector, as well as individual citizens—to assure the absolute equality and complete economic and social integration into German mainstream society of Germans of African descent and other racial minorities. It is only through constant and concerted vigilance that Germans can hope to prevent repeating the horrors of the Holocaust.[157]

  Others chime in with similar sentiments. They, too, say that racism and discrimination rear their ugly heads ever so high, even in the brand new united Germany.

  African students began arriving in both East and West Germany in the early 1960s. The many layers of the African presence here mean that some black German families are in the fifth generation, says [historian Paulette] Reed-Anderson.

  Still, blacks in Germany have had a particularly hard time changing attitudes. While sizable black communities in the US, Britain, and France fought discrimination, anchoring their demands for civil rights in citizenship, even blacks in Germany who are citizens and speak the language as their native tongue are confronted with odd looks at best, blows at worst.

  “I’m tired of always having to explain myself,” says Ricky Reiser. “The typical questions are: How long have you been here? How long are you staying? When are you leaving?” The daughter of a German and a black American soldier, Ms. Reiser runs the European-African Cultural Center in Berlin and is editor in chief of Afrolook magazine.

  Although events like Black History Month and the increasing presence of Afrodeutsche in the German media and music scene are encouraging, Reiser remains skeptical. Racial discrimination in housing and employment is commonplace and not punishable by law, and the current debate on dual citizenship has renewed the question of what it means to be German.

  “Little has changed in the attitudes of Germans,” says Reiser, “with the result that our children are growing up with latent racism.”[158]

  And being born Black in Germany is not a necessary qualifier to be victimized by racism or to be discriminated against. “They’ll discriminate against you if you’re Black from anywhere,” complains Bobby[§§§§§§§§§§§], a former GI who was stationed in Frankfurt.

  Bobby married Gertrud and moved back to America where they had three children. Unfortunately, Gertrud later died of cancer. Bobby now cares for the children alone.

  A chorus of voices joins Bobby’s in his complaints about the overall racist atmosphere in Germany. And, it is true. It does not matter from where in the African Diaspora one originates. If he or she lives in Germany, the likelihood of feeling the brunt of racism at least on some level is quite high.

  “The common denominator is that you’re black, but the only reason that's important is because other people make it that way,” says Paulette Reed-Anderson, an African-American historian who has lived in Berlin since 1983. In reality the black community here is diverse, consisting of Afrodeutsche (literally Afro-Germans), Africans, African-Americans, and Caribbean blacks.

  No statistics on the black population in Germany exist, though the number is estimated to be about 250,000. Ms. Reed-Anderson says that since German unification in 1990, Berlin’s number of Africans alone has doubled to 13,500.[159]

  Regrettably, discrimination is as inescapable today as it was back in Hitler’s Germany. Fortunately, Afro-Germans and other Blacks are still better off now than they were during the Third Reich.

  Interestingly, there is also yet another group which is also better off now than they were during Hitler’s regime. They, too, were persecuted, brutalized, tortured, raped, and murdered, just likes Blacks.

  Hitler even vowed to exterminate all of them! There is a difference, though, between this group and Blacks living in Germany during World War II. What is the difference?

  This new group, which is the subject of the next chapter, was composed almost exclusively of blond-haired blue-eyed red-blooded Germans. Pure Aryans! Yet, despite this, they were essentially called, the “Niggers of Europe”!

  Who were they?

  Chapter Six

  White Imprisoned Germans:

  Treated Like Blacks?

  “Today a one-hundred-percent Aryan can easily become a ‘Negro’ in his own country if, for

  example, … he holds the Gospel as a higher

  law than various government directives.”

  —Michel Reynaud and Sylvie Graffard

  “The ‘Negroes’ in Europe,”

  The Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Nazis

  “And just how is it possible that during the Nazi era, blond-haired, blue-eyed, lily-white Germans, enriched with Aryan[************] blood, could be treated as if they were members of the ‘accursed’ Black race?” someone may ask. Easy. All they had to be were Jehovah’s Witnesses.[††††††††††††]

  Yes, thousands of Aryan-blood-rich Jehovah’s Witnesses in Nazi Germany were indeed the “Negroes” in Europe.[‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡] They were discriminated against, unjustly incarcerated, brutalized, hung, raped, run out of town, fired from their jobs with no justification, and even murdered in various ways, among other unimaginable things.

  So, as startling as it may seem what happened to Blacks in Nazi Germany also happened to White German Witnesses of Jehovah. Why did the Nazis persecute the Witnesses? While a number of reasons can be listed, they primarily would not subscribe to Nazi propaganda.

  That included everything from performing the Nazi salute and saying “Heil Hitler” to believing in White racial superiority.

  Parallels Between Jehovah’s

  Witnesses and African Americans

  Interestingly, in the United States of America, the government’s efforts to restrict the civil rights of Blacks and Jehovah’s Witnesses—as well as the willingness of both groups to have their day in court against the government—have been historically parallel.[§§§§§§§§§§§§]

  In plain English, Blacks and Jehovah’s Witnesses have virtually fought the same court battles against government intrusion into constitutionally guaranteed civil liberties.[*************] Much of what the Witnesses preach has had a unique appeal to African Americans.

  Substantiating this fact is an article entitled, “Ties Between Blacks and Jehovah’s Witnesses explored,” that appeared in the Wednesday, July 17, 2002, edition of the Wave newspaper, which covers the greater Los Angeles area.

  It was rather thorough in noting a unique, long-standing kinship between Blacks and Witnesses as was reflected in the book, Jehovah’s Witnesses: The African American Enigma—A Contemporary Study (Vol. I), released in 2002. A portion of the article reads as follows:

  Wallace D. Fard [also known as Fard Muhammad], founder of the Nation of Islam, was apparently influenced by Noble Drew Ali, who culled information for his organization from Jehovah’s Witnesses…. Fard’s Nation of Islam theology was created using tenets from the Bible, the Koran and Jehovah’s Witnesses teaching tracts.

  Fard even urged his followers to get radios to listen to the speeches of Joseph F. Rutherford, leader of the Witnesses…. In Norfolk Prison Colony, Malcolm X studied the Bible under Jehovah’s Witness[es]…

  Muhammad Ali also came into close personal contact with a Jehovah’s Witness…When the boxing champion refused the draft based on his religious beliefs, he utilized the services of Jehovah’s Witness lawyer Hayden C. Covington to help win his case.

  Covington was the Watchtower attorney who argued Witnesses’ ministerial deferment cases before the United States Supreme Court. In 1955, he had argued and won more cases before the nation’s highest court than any other man in American history….

  People of African descent began to trickle into the organization around the turn of the century, and came
in droves during the 1950s and 1960s… Additionally, nationwide, Witnesses’ legal battles for the right not to salute the flag have paved the way for people to enjoy this freedom today.[160]

  More recently, the Witnesses won an impressive court battle before the United States Supreme Court. The town of Stratton, Ohio, had required them to purchase a business license prior to participating in their signature door-to-door ministry.

  It was basically a matter of re-inventing the wheel. Similar Witness cases had been argued before the Supreme Court decades prior to the Stratton case. The Witnesses won the vast majority of those cases too.

  Given these facts, it becomes quite clear that Jehovah’s Witnesses have had very much in common with African Americans.

  This conclusion has not escaped the watchful eye of historians, researchers, government officials, and others. That is why, in the context of our discussion, Jehovah’s Witnesses have unhesitatingly been called, “The ‘Negroes’ in Europe.”

  And yes, the court victories the Witnesses enjoyed were partially duplicated by African Americans during the civil rights era of the 1960s. What the Witnesses had done Blacks were now beginning to do, namely, win court battles.

  Witnesses’ Civil Rights Violated

  But Witness victories ensuring their civil rights were not to be had in Nazi Germany. In fact, the civil liberties of the Witnesses, yes, these “‘Negroes’ of Europe,” were severely curtailed.

  Freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and freedom of assembly were non-existent for the Witnesses under Nazi rule. The following account illustrates the point well.

  In 1931, it was once again the officials in Bavaria who took the lead in the fight against [Jehovah’s Witnesses]. By misapplying the emergency ordinance of March 28, 1931, dealing with political disturbances, they suddenly saw an opportunity to ban the [Witnesses’] literature. In Munich, on November 14, 1931, [Witness] books were confiscated. Four days later the Munich police officials issued a statement, applicable throughout Bavaria, placing a ban on all literature put out by the Bible Students [a.k.a. Jehovah’s Witnesses]. … On January 30, 1933, Hitler took over the position of Reich’s chancellor. On February 4 he issued a decree permitting the police to confiscate literature ‘endangering public order and security.’ This decree also restricted freedoms of assembly and press.[161]

 

‹ Prev