It's worth recalling that the US & UK absolutely backed West German agitation over the Oder-Neisse line during the Cold War, claiming that the Germans needed it for agricultural production. It's only because of the USSR that the Poles still have that territory. Of course the Poles naturally don't care about anything the Soviets ever did to help them. As far as I can tell, the Germans never really gave up the Oder-Neisse line issue until Bonn's annexation of the GDR.

But why wouldn't Labor voters vote for Hadash or Meretz, why do they vote for Sharon and Olmert's party? The fact that Labor voters were closer to Likudniks than those other groups I think reveals a lot.

@ Yonni,

Yes I hope that movement leads to a zeitgeist change in Israel.

Yes, political support from SU was a big reason why Poland didn't have to worry about losing the area to German revisionists. But Kaiser is a contemporary German revisionist, which makes him more disturbing than the past ones.

How!? Because I realize that the north will never leave my nation alone (Which by the way, I take offense to being called 'backwater' seeing as how we were the most powerful in the 30 years war, something that your feeble Bohemians couldn't manage) until they are completely united. Because I realize that Bayern is subjugated by the north as a replacement for the Ost-Preußen and Danzig loss (which btw, Danzig VOTED itself into the Third Reich). You disgust me for calling someone else disturbing while your nation expelled an entire race of people.

Sorry, I realized my English error.

'You disgust me for calling someone else disturbing while your nation expelled an entire race of people.'

Really should be "You disgust me for calling someone disturbing while they are defending a race of people your nation expelled."

looking for a proverb, something about stones and a glass house

Hold up. How is Bayern subjugated again? It's the 4th richest Land in Germany. Germany has been governed for most of the post-war period by the CDU which allows virtual independence to the Bavarian Social Union, a unique amount of autonomy that no other province receives. The Social Union itself has governed the Land without interruption, essentially, since the end of the war. So how is Bavaria subjugated?

Germany has no interest in Gdansk anymore. It has been emptied of Germans. They're never going to be reunited. Yes Danzig "voted" Nazi, I hardly think that makes their cause very sympathetic. It is absolutely true the Polish Sanitation regime was terrible to ethnic minorities of all kinds, particularly Ukrainians who they corralled into concentration camps, but the whole reason we have had peace since WWII is because the border/ethnic issues have been decisively resolved.

"You disgust me for calling someone else disturbing while your nation expelled an entire race of people."

Irony alert. As opposed to your nation, which not only expelled but slaughtered entire races of people.

"Which by the way, I take offense to being called 'backwater' "

I'm pretty sure he's talking about industrialization. Bavaria is primarily agricultural is it not, or at least historically has been.

Kaiser, if you haven't noticed, every non-city state in the 17th century was an agrarian backwater in the hindsight because agriculture was the most important part of national economies until industrialization kicked in. Industrialization that was almost nonexistent in Bavaria in comparison to other German states which is why it was a proper agrarian backwater in the 19th century. Being an agrarian country had no influence on military prowess in the Early Modern Age so your refference to the 30 Years War is really off the mark.

It also bothers me little that Czech Protestant estates lost their fight during the civil war. Not to mention that Bavaria was definitely not the most powerful power in the war, it was not even the most powerful Catholic power. It gained Upper Palatinate and Palatinate electoral vote (which was useless since all succeeding HRE rulers were Habsburgs anyway) while protestants and co. won the right of religious freedom, freedom for Netherlands and huge territorial gains for France and Sweden. Yup, Bavaria definitely won that one.

Regarding the expel, not all Germans were expelled, notably no anti-fascists (passive resistance wasn't sufficient, active anti-fascist stance was necessary - Czechoslovaks were deemed innocent if they didn't collaborated so Germans had it tougher to prove themselves), skilled workers needed to keep the country running and those married to Czech counterparts. They were later subjugated to state discrimination though, that's true. The wild expulsion was a unnecessary bloody act as I already admitted but the expulsion in itself was OKed by all powers and it helped to build the peace Central Europe enjoyed ever since.

"I'm pretty sure he's talking about industrialization. Bavaria is primarily agricultural is it not, or at least historically has been."

I'm talking exactly about the historical agrarian economy. The waves of Sudeten immigrants that had mostly industrial background were a huge kickstart to Bavarian development.

In the 1880's the Bavarian king was forced to resign power to the Prueßisch Reich, from that day on, we lived free no more and were ruled by the laws off Berlin.

You forget that General Tilly is one of the most recognized Generals of that entire war and he led the Bavarian forces into battle.

You gave them none of their traditional lands, and expelled 500.000 thousand people and kept 50.000. Do you truly think all 500.000 thousand of those people were facist? Your nation even required forced labour of Germans until the 1950's. Why won't your nation just let the Landsmannschaft back in? They have renounced all hostilities and wish to promote Europeanism.

And backwater refers to uncivilized, not agrarian.

Didn't Bavarian maintain its own army (who swore oaths to the Bavarian king) until the end of WWI?

"Do you truly think all 500.000 thousand of those people were facist?"

Almost. Henlein got 90% of the German vote in 1938 and 70% in 1935. His party won the most votes of any party in 1935.

To the Bavarian king, and more so to the German Empire (ie. Prussia)

And we are talking 1945, not 1935.

"To the Bavarian king, and more so to the German Empire"

They had their own military and autonomy over their own affairs. In what world is that subjugation? Bavarians have a Texan-style misplaced sense of grievance.

"And we are talking 1945, not 1935."?

So what, they voted for a party that sought the destruction of Czechoslovakia in overwhelming numbers, and voluntarily became citizens of the Reich thus renouncing Czech citizenship, as has already been mentioned. They gambled on the prospects of German annexation of Czech, and they lost. Expulsion was much more merciful than what Slavs had been subject to by the Reich.

@Putin

"But why wouldn't Labor voters vote for Hadash or Meretz, why do they vote for Sharon and Olmert's party?"

Because Hadash and Meretz are considered small leftist parties, and it is easier to make one step towards the center (Kadima) than 3 steps to the left (Hadash and Meretz). In addition, Kadima was very fresh and trendy, giving some new alternative to decades old Avoda-Likud dichotomy.

Oh, the brilliant Tilly whose forces massacred 5/6 of the population of Magdeburg, an act so brutal that it enriched the German language for the term "magdeburgisieren", to destroy something completely. It's nice you identify with such a guy. He's overshadowed in military skill by a handful of his contemporaries anyway - Gustav II, Koniecpolski, Wallenstein...

Backwater as defined by Merriam-Webster: an isolated or backward place or condition
<a distant backwater that didn't even have electricity at that time>
Nothing to do with being uncivilized, a proper noun to be applied to agrarian country when industrialization is underway in all neighbouring regions.

Expelled Germans can come back anytime they want, there are no restrictions on buying assets by non-residents in the Czech Republic except for used arable land and forests. If you mean they should regain Czech nationality, they voluntarily given that up when Hitler annexed Sudeten - those who actively opposed that hostile act were treated as anti-fascists and weren't expelled after all. If you mean they should receive reparations, you have a pretty high moral expectations. Let's make an analogy with African-Americans. They were enslaved against their will (unlike Sudeten Germans who willingly accepted their übermensch role), transported to a totally different part of the world (Sudeten Germans were moved to a country they always wanted to be a part of) and abused for centuries there (did you Bavarians abused Sudeten Germans?) before they finally became nominally equal (Sudeten Germans are treated like any other German social group in Germany). While you can say that a significant part of African-Americans are better off economically by living in the USA rather than Africa, the same applies even more for Sudeten Germans since being a citizen of Bavaria means you are almost certainly better off than being a citizen of borderlands in the Czech Republic. African-Americans don't receive any reparations for their historical hardships (and AA is not much of a help for current hardship as well) so I don't find it feasible for the Czech Republic to pay reparations to expelled Germans, who are richer than Czechs anyway. It's an issue of the past that politicians across Europe agree should be left to past.

And regarding forced labour for unexpelled Germans, they received the hardest of work for 80% of the price standard for that work. Compare it with the people from whole occupied Europe that were subject to Totaleinsatz during the war, received equally hard work and gained absolutely nothing in return except for substandard food rations. If it wasn't for some German initiatives that acknowledge the evil Germany did before and during the war, those people would never receive anything. Below subsistence natural remuneration and 80% of a salary is a damn big difference.

Well I guess that's the point I was trying to make, that progressiveness/leftism is so dead in Israel than Labor is considered only one step away from Ariel Sharon.

I guess this is the result of leaving Southern Lebanon and receiving missiles on Northern Israel and kidnapping soldiers and civilians; leaving Gaza strip and receiving missiles on Southern Israel and kidnapping soldiers; and giving up the control over Judea and receiving suicide bombers in Tel Aviv, Jerusalem, Be'er Sheva and Haifa.

The formula "peace for territories" was proven to be highly ineffective.

So it's all national security. There are no other issues in Israel? Everybody's just fine with Likud-style economic and social policies?

Likud's strategy is, and has always been "we'll discuss everything else when there is peace" and then they help make peace impossible.

The frustration I have is that in principle I support Israel, but I can't stand the constant stream of rightwing politicians that end up running the country. It makes it easy for the left to fall into the trap of supporting so-called "national liberation movements" aimed at Israel, because Israel has been so willing to be used by American interests. Zionism was originally a socialist movement, but somewhere it lost its way as Israel turned into America's bulldog. A very big shame. Israel has so much potential to be a beacon of equality and progress, instead of militarism and imperialist collaboration.

First, it's very hard not to make national security number one issue, simply because a few hours ago a Grad rocket was fired at the city my parents and the rest of my family live in. This is a very pressing issue.

Second, I am personally very close to the libertarian way of thinking (although I don't fully agree with everything in this philosophy). The only party that openly supports capitalism is Likud. Maybe it is more correct to say, that out of the leaders of the big 3 parties, only one openly supports capitalism (Benjamin Netaniyahu), while all the others tend to be more tender of socialism. In the last half a year there is a very strong "we want a change" movement, which demand social justice (whatever that means), and by talking with people who support this movement I have become more pro-Likud regarding economic and social issues.

However, the only time I was proud of Israeli politics was when Shinui was elected and became the 3rd or 4th biggest party - simply because they offered an alternative to ultra-religious Shas. I wish that there was separation of state and religion in Israel.

Regarding your "a beacon of equality and progress" remark.

I have written two big signs and went to the "1 million demonstration" a few months back. Everybody were against Netaniyahu, pro-social, demanded more state control, etc.

The first sign said: "No to equality, yes to equal opportunities" and the second one said: "Increase the competition in the market, because I want a chance to become tycoon too".

You cannot imagine the amount of support I received in this demonstration (although it was totally against what they were saying - the movement wants to reduce taxes and make government to give more to citizens, go figure), and I have received a lot of curses.

I have written a blog about it, but it is in Hebrew. Maybe Google translate can help:
http://hazir.co.il/%D7%94%D7%A4%D7%92%D7%A0%D7%AA%20%D7%94%D7%9E%D7%9C%D7%99%D7%95%D7%9F

One more thing I forgot... A few of the "Labor youth" (not exactly, there is a movement called Working and Studying Youth, and they are traditionally leftist - Avoda (Labor) and so on), saw me with my signs at the demonstration. They began pointing at me, and after a minute began to chant: "No to equal opportunities, yes to equality". I understand that they are just teenagers, but their political education comes from the grown-ups.

So, smart capitalists ( :) ) support Likud, and socialists support Avoda. Whoever is not happy with both of them and does not share a deep bond with other parties, will most likely vote Kadima.

It is also important to stress that unlike in the US, Israeli citizens do not vote for a president. We vote for a party. It is a tough decision for a party whether during elections to focus on the person leading it or to focus on the party itself ("the team"). So, a lot of people voting Likud don't vote for Likud, but vote for Netaniyahu. A lot of people who might put Livni (head of Kadima) as a prime-minister, might actually do it because they trust the Kadima party members to lead the policy they agree with.

So you think Netanyahu isn't encouraging enough market competition? I don't understand the point of your signs, other than to annoy people.

I'm also trying to figure out how a party that openly disavowed even social democracy and whose leaders over the past 20 years defected to a centrist party is "socialist".

"Enough"? Enough is subjective. Yes, I would like to see more competition in government-based/protected services, like electrical company, public transportation, food import, communication, etc.

The point of my signs was that most people were against the rich, wanting them to pay much higher taxes (some even said up to 90% tax), and against the companies - once again, to make them pay more taxes. I was against it, as I believe that the best way to make a citizen to pay less is not to force companies into strict price-regulation (which was also suggested), but by increasing competition by removing government-based entry barriers.

Regarding your 2nd comment - what party are we talking about?