In black and white history, everyone who fought communist occupation, was nazi.
In real history, both Soviets and Germans drafted everyone they could catch, and Germany's side was the one where you could fight Soviet atrocities. Think Holodomor, think mass deportation, think Gulag, ... So often brothers were on different sides and mothers shot by Soviets for "traitor family member".
It's kinda same idea US dems are calling everyone else nazi: for fighting communists!
The elites created 2 camps. They led both. They antagonized and abused the people and placed the blame on one camp or the other, ensuring everyone chose the designated opposing camp.
Then they got people to kill each other in battle while they committed atrocities off the battlefield under the flags of those people.
Then they told a history about how glorious and heroic and just it all was of the winners and villainous of the losers. Pride for one. Shame for the other. Perdition for all.
Yup. Soviets were khazarian project. Hitler was khazarian project. First funded by the same banksters, until they could pay back with what they looted. To create next project.
The issue in 1940 was simple at the start. The Crown fled the country, and set up shop in London. This was a transgression against the constitution and with that the Crown lost the State of the Netherlands.
The Kingdom functions as a sort of central guidance for several countries, of which the State of the Netherlands is one.
In May of 1940 it was clear, at least based on public knowledge, the Crown would remain in the Netherlands and "our" boys fought heroically despite being outclassed in firepower and quality of weaponry.
That changed when the Crown, being the Queen and her Ministers, fled the country, taking gold and other treasures with them. Only later it came out, that this flight had been planned for years and the UK government played along.
By leaving, this left the State on it's own. Based on the Law of War, a head of state was appointed. This man was Seys Inquart, an Austrian lawyer.
That the troops were rather disappointed at the sight that the Crown has fled the country, only the surrender of the military was an option. Since then the Queen: koningin in Dutch, got the moniker: konin-ging. It almost sounds the same, but is a quib to illuminate her cowardly run. And this is not the first time the oranges have fled.
That particular time in space raised a lot of questions. In the UK there was a court case where a Dutch State citizen was refusing military service under the Dutch Crown. For political reasons, the UK Bench recognized the Queen as the lawful head of state of the Dutch people, something that is best left to the Dutch people at the time. A little trick of International Law.
Another issue in the Netherlands was the rise of communism. In 1942 there was a strike, organized by communists. More than a million people, on a population of 6-10, partook in that strike.
The Commies were best organized to resist occupation by the Germans. Names like: Hannie Schaft en many other so called hero's of the resistance, were in fact commies.
The fear for that commie organization, and the power it represented was considerable. The thought of Soviet meddling in the Dutch State affairs was quite logical and present.
Even today, when you would care to look at an electoral map over time, certain parts of the Netherlands are still steeped in lefty ideology. But that is not relevant to the point I am making.
The point I am making is that the war against communism was real, not some hypothetical. And the context in which this discourse against communism took place is a legal null and void of the right to rule.
The 1942 Atlantic Charter, signed by Queen of the Kingdom of the Netherlands, Wilhelmina, in order to "restore" sovereign rights, at least in the Netherlands, is a farce.
What to do next?
The Germans as occupiers, had no interest in forcing the issue, but planned on organizing a referendum so as to give fellow Germanics a chance to freely choose to go "heim ins Reich". In order to accomplish this mission, the economic development of the Netherlands was priority. In this sense, the reports by Seys Inquart to Hitler are quite interesting to read.
Most Dutch are under the impression that it was 5 years of suffering. It was not. The coloration happened as a result of the 1944/1945 Winter, caused by the failure of operation Market Garden and the incessant bombing of the Allies of key infrastructure: Arnhem itself, Rotterdam, the Dikes in Zeeland. Due to shortages in fuel, argricultural produce could only be distributed with difficulty, and a large part of it was confiscated for the war effort.
Then there is the question of the future. Some remained avid Royalist. Others were commies, and there were indeed national-socialists, having in common with the commies to get rid of the royalty.
Prince Bernhard, the former SS-rider, even tried to be appointed as Reichs-Kommissar to the Netherlands but was refused by Hitler. And when that failed, new plans were made to come out on top en repossess that patch of land.
So, there were those, looking at the constitution of world-affairs, to promote a Europe for Europeans. The German recovery since 1933 stood in stark contrast with the state of affairs in the Netherlands during the same timeframe.
And ... yeah ... German military was better equipped than the hopelessly old fashioned and outdated gunnery the Dutch could field, thanks to the tireless hobby of the Oranges to undercut the military. This had happened in 1780 too, when the Dutch lost the 4th Anglo-Dutch war due to austerity on the military budget.
So, there is the moral, financial, economical, political, and personal reasons to view enlisting in the Waffen-SS as desirable.
One other observation:
Many of their countrymen who had suffered under Nazi rule back home called for executing returning Dutch Waffen-SS men after the war. The government stripped them of their citizenship, but most of the volunteers received relatively light sentences of four to five years. Those who fought against the Western Allies received longer sentences.
I would like to add that dispossession was common practice right after the war, on the wings of a propaganda war of being: fout in de oorlog.
And there were many reasons for being: fout.
Being married to a German.
of course: volunteering in the Waffen-SS.
Accepting gold and silver as payment for goods and services.
etc.
The SS was a small fraction of the German armed forces. Seems disingenuous to equate men who fought FOR their country and people in this manner.
Latvians saw an opportunity to get out from under the Russian influence which had persisted for decades
In black and white history, everyone who fought communist occupation, was nazi.
In real history, both Soviets and Germans drafted everyone they could catch, and Germany's side was the one where you could fight Soviet atrocities. Think Holodomor, think mass deportation, think Gulag, ... So often brothers were on different sides and mothers shot by Soviets for "traitor family member".
It's kinda same idea US dems are calling everyone else nazi: for fighting communists!
Many of these SS were used to guard german prisoners at Nuremberg. More than 1/2 the SS at the end of the war were non german.
Top leaders yes. Most of the ss were just soldiers many of them not even German. A lot of the death camps were staffed by Ukrainians.
May have, not may of.
Erm OK.
The elites created 2 camps. They led both. They antagonized and abused the people and placed the blame on one camp or the other, ensuring everyone chose the designated opposing camp.
Then they got people to kill each other in battle while they committed atrocities off the battlefield under the flags of those people.
Then they told a history about how glorious and heroic and just it all was of the winners and villainous of the losers. Pride for one. Shame for the other. Perdition for all.
Yup. Soviets were khazarian project. Hitler was khazarian project. First funded by the same banksters, until they could pay back with what they looted. To create next project.
Yes, usually, these kind of things are a bit more complicated than a single minded this or that.
Example: https://wikiless.org/wiki/Volunteer_Legion_Netherlands?lang=en
The issue in 1940 was simple at the start. The Crown fled the country, and set up shop in London. This was a transgression against the constitution and with that the Crown lost the State of the Netherlands.
The Kingdom functions as a sort of central guidance for several countries, of which the State of the Netherlands is one.
In May of 1940 it was clear, at least based on public knowledge, the Crown would remain in the Netherlands and "our" boys fought heroically despite being outclassed in firepower and quality of weaponry.
That changed when the Crown, being the Queen and her Ministers, fled the country, taking gold and other treasures with them. Only later it came out, that this flight had been planned for years and the UK government played along.
By leaving, this left the State on it's own. Based on the Law of War, a head of state was appointed. This man was Seys Inquart, an Austrian lawyer.
That the troops were rather disappointed at the sight that the Crown has fled the country, only the surrender of the military was an option. Since then the Queen: koningin in Dutch, got the moniker: konin-ging. It almost sounds the same, but is a quib to illuminate her cowardly run. And this is not the first time the oranges have fled.
That particular time in space raised a lot of questions. In the UK there was a court case where a Dutch State citizen was refusing military service under the Dutch Crown. For political reasons, the UK Bench recognized the Queen as the lawful head of state of the Dutch people, something that is best left to the Dutch people at the time. A little trick of International Law.
Another issue in the Netherlands was the rise of communism. In 1942 there was a strike, organized by communists. More than a million people, on a population of 6-10, partook in that strike.
The Commies were best organized to resist occupation by the Germans. Names like: Hannie Schaft en many other so called hero's of the resistance, were in fact commies.
The fear for that commie organization, and the power it represented was considerable. The thought of Soviet meddling in the Dutch State affairs was quite logical and present.
Even today, when you would care to look at an electoral map over time, certain parts of the Netherlands are still steeped in lefty ideology. But that is not relevant to the point I am making.
The point I am making is that the war against communism was real, not some hypothetical. And the context in which this discourse against communism took place is a legal null and void of the right to rule.
The 1942 Atlantic Charter, signed by Queen of the Kingdom of the Netherlands, Wilhelmina, in order to "restore" sovereign rights, at least in the Netherlands, is a farce.
What to do next?
The Germans as occupiers, had no interest in forcing the issue, but planned on organizing a referendum so as to give fellow Germanics a chance to freely choose to go "heim ins Reich". In order to accomplish this mission, the economic development of the Netherlands was priority. In this sense, the reports by Seys Inquart to Hitler are quite interesting to read.
Most Dutch are under the impression that it was 5 years of suffering. It was not. The coloration happened as a result of the 1944/1945 Winter, caused by the failure of operation Market Garden and the incessant bombing of the Allies of key infrastructure: Arnhem itself, Rotterdam, the Dikes in Zeeland. Due to shortages in fuel, argricultural produce could only be distributed with difficulty, and a large part of it was confiscated for the war effort.
Then there is the question of the future. Some remained avid Royalist. Others were commies, and there were indeed national-socialists, having in common with the commies to get rid of the royalty.
Prince Bernhard, the former SS-rider, even tried to be appointed as Reichs-Kommissar to the Netherlands but was refused by Hitler. And when that failed, new plans were made to come out on top en repossess that patch of land.
So, there were those, looking at the constitution of world-affairs, to promote a Europe for Europeans. The German recovery since 1933 stood in stark contrast with the state of affairs in the Netherlands during the same timeframe.
And ... yeah ... German military was better equipped than the hopelessly old fashioned and outdated gunnery the Dutch could field, thanks to the tireless hobby of the Oranges to undercut the military. This had happened in 1780 too, when the Dutch lost the 4th Anglo-Dutch war due to austerity on the military budget.
So, there is the moral, financial, economical, political, and personal reasons to view enlisting in the Waffen-SS as desirable.
One other observation:
I would like to add that dispossession was common practice right after the war, on the wings of a propaganda war of being: fout in de oorlog.
And there were many reasons for being: fout.
added: https://wikiless.org/wiki/Waffen-SS_foreign_volunteers_and_conscripts?lang=en
Interesting to consider the diversity list in light of the Ukraine war.