This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Does anyone have a list of the members of the "Flensburg government", the positions they held, and dates of office? I've seen such a list before but can't find it online. Homey 16:31, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
Graf Lutz von Schwerin-Krosigk (Foreign Minister, Minister of Finance, and presiding officer of the Cabinet), Dr. Wilhelm Stuckart (Minister of the Interior and Minister of Culture), Albert Speer (Minister of Industry and Production), Dr. Herbert Backe (Minister of Food, Agriculture and Forests), Dr. Franz Seldte (Minister of Labor and Social Affairs), and Dr. Dorpmueller (Minister of Posts and Communications).
http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v04/v04p305_Thompson.html
This is "revisionist history" and I do not associate myself with it in any way.
BScar23625 21:26, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
What position, if any, did Rosenberg have? Homey 02:18, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
Homey. Without rummaging through the internet, I don't know. Actually, I might rummage if I find myself with nothing better to do for an hour. What do you think of Thompson's crazy article?. I wonder who he is?. The look of the article suggests he has some credible academic background. Bob BScar23625 08:34, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
Qualle. Thankyou for your contribution. You and I agree that Keitel and Jodl were never members of the Donitz cabinet. The main article is inaccurate in indicating this. The Flensburg government was effectively ended on 23 May 1945, but parts of it carried on functioning for some time after that date. A trawl through the internet indicates that the last meetings of various bodies associated with that government took place as late as August 1945. Bob BScar23625 14:22, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
Qualle. Perhaps it is impertinent of me to discuss German history with you?. However, I make a couple of points. The Flensburg government had some control over German forces up to and beyond 7 May. They were in radio contact with army units and U-boats deployed between the Arctic and the South Atlantic. For example, they ordered the German garrison in the Channel Islands to surrender. Also, there is evidence that residual elements of the government continued shuffling paper right up to August (see the article referenced above). Bob BScar23625 16:21, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
People should please feel free to actually edit the article. Particularly as the two of you are far better informed on the matter than I am.
As for the revisionist article, I don't know if the guy is an academic with revisionist views or just a very enthusiastic amateur. I found it interesting that he made no mention of Himmler (or Rosenberg) - perhaps in an attempt to put Donitz in the best light. I would prefer not to link to the article as it's veracity is suspect (given the above evidence of "lying by ommission"). Thanks for the info on Rosenberg, anyone know what position he held - he was minister of the occupied territories in the East under Hitler but that would have been a particularly phantomic position to be given in Flensburg. Homey 16:30, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
Rosenberg and Himmler were never members of the Flensburg government. They showed up first in Ploen, then Flensburg, and tried to insinuate themselves into Donitz cabinet. Rosenberg claimed that, as the most senior surviving Party Reichsleiter, he alone had the authority to dissolve the Nazi Party (and he intended to do so). Himmler tried to wheedle some form of official recognition from Donitz and hung around Flensburg for some time in early May until finally disappearing with a few close assistants in an attempt to avoid arrest. Donitz refused to work with either and did NOT take them into his cabinet. He did, however, draft official letters relieving them of their former offices-- an attempt to let them know in no uncertain terms that they weren't wanted. These letters, dated May 6, must be the genesis of the info in this article that both men were members of the Flensburg cabinet until May 6; not really correct, as you can see. Since Himmler was removed from all his offices by Hitler on or about April 28, his "official" tenure as Interior Minister ended then; and since Rosenberg was not included in Hitler's political testament, then upon Hitler's death and Donitz's succession, Rosenberg ceased to be a government minister at that time. In any case, though physically present in Flensburg and desirous of attention (and whatever scraps of power they might hang on to), Donitz and Speer were adamant about NOT cooperating with these two, especially Himmler, in any way. In fact, when Himmler requested a plane to fly him to Prague (still controlled by the SS), Speer and Donitz considered giving him one and ordering the pilot to land at an Allied airfield. 24.250.114.65 ( talk) 01:27, 16 August 2010 (UTC)TexxasFinn
Dönitz says he was arrested on board a steamship by the Allied Control Commission, not at his HQ by the British Army. I'm going to change the article unless someone can come up with a source for the current text. Rees11 ( talk) 01:12, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
The Donitz government was HQ'd on the steamship Patria, based at Flensburg. British Army personnel were ordered by the ACC to arrest the government members on May 23. 24.250.114.65 ( talk) 01:33, 16 August 2010 (UTC)TexxasFinn
Something is needed to make this make sense: "At the same time, the Fascist press on both sides of the Atlantic has put it abroad that conditions in Germany in 1918, when German Rightists produced similar fairy-tales of impending chaos". It looks as though it should read something like "...conditions in Germany resemble those in 1918..." [guess at omitted wording emphasised]. PMLawrence ( talk) 12:00, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
Why does it say the German Instrument of Surrender was signed on 23 May when it was actually signed on 7-8 May? Rees11 ( talk) 23:00, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
Does the administration really require it's own country infobox? It was not a "Provisional government" or successor state to the Third Reich, only an administration of it ( Cabinet Schwerin von Krosigk). The same constitution, laws, etc. of the Reich were still in place and effect. People have begun linking to it from other articles purporting that it was an actual separate country. I'll remove it soon if no one has any arguments. Lt.Specht ( talk) 00:41, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
The text reads at present:"Therefore, on June 5, 1945, the German state officially ceased to exist, and Germany was placed under Allied military occupation." I'd object to the expression state, it should be replaced by government. -- 41.15.94.169 ( talk) 11:49, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
This article is fine as an article about a unique administration of Nazi Germany, but it was still a government of Nazi Germany. I am removing the infobox that insinuates that it was a separate state.-- R-41 ( talk) 17:26, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
I second this. The Flensburg government was just a government of Nazi Germany. It is not a country or territorial entity in any way - the article on that is Nazi Germany. It seems to confuse some people into thinking this is some kind of a "successor state" to Nazi Germany.
The only appropriate infobox for an article with a topic like this, is {{ Infobox government cabinet}}. -- Director ( talk) 03:07, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
There appears to be some kind of weird POV afoot, as in "these are the good guys that came to power when Hitler killed himself". The article Schwerin von Krosigk cabinet needs to be merged here forthwith. This is a very strange article that seems to be presented as a successor state to Nazi Germany, as somehow being different from Nazi Germany - rather than being a government of it, while being headed by the NSDAP, and appointed by Hitler himself.
Not to ramble, the Schwerin von Krosigk cabinet article basically has the exact same topic as this one, I think its obviously a WP:CFORK. -- Director ( talk) 03:40, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
a recent edit proposes that Dönitz radioed authority to Keitel for the Karlshorst surrender. I have not seen this stated anywhere, is contrary to some accounts, and appears to confuse the Reims and Karlshort events. My reading of the accounts is that Jodl at Reims was acting on behalf of, and in contact with, Dönitz. The requirement of the Allied powers that the commanders of the three German armed services should attend the Karlshorst signing in person was specfically intended to cut out any suggestion that they were acting for the Dönitz government - which the Americans and Russians did not recognise. Hence, no occasion was provided for Dönitz to be contacted in respect of negotiations in respect of the amended Karlshorst text; Keitel and co. were required to accept the changes on their own authority, and did so. As I understand it; unless there is a source that says different. On which see http://museum-karlshorst.de/en/component/content/article/38.html TomHennell ( talk) 10:03, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
I have reverted the following " At the signing ceremony, the German emissaries delivered to the Allied representatives the telegram from Dönitz, authorizing them to sign the instrument of surrender. [1] ". Donitz certainly nominated the three Armed Forces representatives; but there is no record I can find that his authorisation telegram was submitted at the Karlshorst meeting. Neither Keitel nor Tedder mention it in their accounts; that I can find. Keitel does record in his memoir that his 'credentials' as Commander in chief of the Army (and those of his counterpart colleagues) were inspected by the Soviets during the afternoon of 8 May, while they were all waiting for Zhukov and Tedder to complete their negotiations around the number and order of Allied signatories. But no mention of having presented them at the ceremony itself. TomHennell ( talk) 18:24, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
References
In a recent edit from editor Qwertyers, the affiliation of Donitz himself has been changed from NSDAP to 'none'. On the face of it, this would contradict the reference, which I read as clearly implying that - while Donitz avoided joining the Party until Jan/Feb 1944, he then did so. There is a continual debate on the Karl Dönitz page as to whether his membership did, or did not, amount to 'being a Nazi'; but I suggest that such matters should be left to that page. At the time that he accepted the role of Hitler's successor, Dönitz was an enrolled NSDAP party member and held a Party card. That he later sought to maintain that his membership was more formal than actual, isn't really a subject for this article. TomHennell ( talk) 11:04, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Flensburg Government. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 07:06, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
Why is the leading picture not of Donitz? He is the most well-known person in the government.-- Jack Upland ( talk) 11:39, 8 September 2020 (UTC)