|
|
Post by crappogre on Aug 6, 2008 10:30:31 GMT
On Stuart's latest blog entry, the old topic of the local oligarchs cosying up to the Nazis has been aired again. It's not something I know a great deal about, so I'd welcome some enlightening discussion on this.
Can I question how exactly the island should have dealt with the occupying German forces? I thought it was generally accepted that they could have made life very difficult for the locals or murdered us all if met with resistance or blatent uncooperation, so the best thing to do was just try to get along for the sake of the local population staying alive. Is that not so?
|
|
Nobody
Junior Member
Posts: 131 
|
Post by Nobody on Aug 9, 2008 12:02:37 GMT
It's a difficult question to answer isn't it?
To the generations brought up on The Great Escape and Return To Castle Wolfenstein, there may be a propensity to think islanders had a moral obligation to have made more of a concerted effort to resist the occupiers.
But I'm damn sure if you physically placed all of those who make derogatory comments about Jersey's lack of resistance into the same scenario - ie: on a small island surrounding by barbed wire and minefields , underneath an armed occupying force who can pretty much treat you as they wish and make up laws as they go along - you'd no doubt find a lot of them suddenly very eager not to rock the boat with the enemy!
That said, I do get the impression that quite a number of islanders weren't exactly averse to accomodating German needs, and on an everyday level subtle examples of resistance could have been better exhibited. I'm not talking about cutting phone wires and booby-trapping vehicles, I'm talking more on a personal level, behaving as if the enemy were the enemy.
|
|
|
|
Post by aurignyexpat on Aug 9, 2008 13:17:24 GMT
On Stuart's latest blog entry, the old topic of the local oligarchs cosying up to the Nazis has been aired again. It's not something I know a great deal about, so I'd welcome some enlightening discussion on this. Can I question how exactly the island should have dealt with the occupying German forces? I thought it was generally accepted that they could have made life very difficult for the locals or murdered us all if met with resistance or blatent uncooperation, so the best thing to do was just try to get along for the sake of the local population staying alive. Is that not so? Hi all, newbie but interested in the islands, particularly at this harrowing time for many. Something I do know a fair bit about is history, and the Channel Islands are often looked at quite unfairly in the period 1940-45. I will add a link to a very good paper about the occupation and although pdf'd at JHT it was not written by locals and gives one of the most balanced and fair accounts I have read. In a nutshell, the reason that the occupation of the CI was 'model' in that resistance was low key, is because that was the strategic aim of the British Government, note not local Jersey or Guernsey, but Whitehall. Yes there was collaboration and fraternisation by some women, but far less than mainland UK would have produced if the Germans had occupied her. The following link explains with evidence. www.jerseyheritagetrust.org/occupation_memorial/historybook/occupationhistorychapter3.pdf |
|
|
|
Post by crappogre on Aug 11, 2008 8:36:07 GMT
Hi aurignyexpat
Thanks for signing up and contributing... interesting stuff
|
|
