4 ms·

> He was never really asked again, until 1981, and then was more or less immediately deported. That's my point - it was relatively easy for someone like him no

by danans 2y ago

> He was never really asked again, until 1981, and then was more or less immediately deported. That's my point - it was relatively easy for someone like him not to raise suspicion in 1950s American society, because the society was very open to accepting and integrating someone like him. Like a "Don't ask, don't tell" for Nazis. It finally took a government commission nearly 30 years to find out the truth about his past and deport him. Contrast this with the very active threats we hear today from some of the loudest political voices to deport legal migrants to the US from Haiti. Both the post-war German migrants of the 1950s and the legal Haitian migrants of today are escaping war and violence, working at manual labor jobs that Americans won't take, and economically revitalizing previously declining communities by starting small businesses, yet the tone toward the Haitians today is starkly different than it was for the Germans.

tptacek 2y ago
I'm pushing back on the idea that Oak Park was open to Nazis in the 1950s and 60s. It was not. What there was was a rapid influx of Germans after the war, and not even 1/4th the knowledge we have today about the Holocaust and Germany's conduct during the war. The fact is: people in Oak Park had the (reasonable!) assumption that if you were allowed to immigrate into the US, you were not a war criminal. Had Kulle been openly a Nazi during his time here, things would have gone very differently. But it basically never came up until the very end, and, when it did, people were extremely squicked out about it. For whatever it's worth: I'm guessing our politics are very similar. Despite the very grim consequences for some of the people we deported, I think we generally made the right decision to do so. And I have no doubt that at every point from 1948 through 2024 that a Haitian immigrant would have had a far different experience in Chicagoland than a German one.
- danans 2y ago
  > For whatever it's worth: I'm guessing our politics are very similar. I intuited that, which is a reason why I think this is a worthwhile debate vs debating with someone who doesn't have similar basic values about our shared humanity. Thanks for your thoughtful responses! > I'm pushing back on the idea that Oak Park was open to Nazis in the 1950s and 60s. It was not. What there was was a rapid influx of Germans after the war, and not even 1/4th the knowledge we have today about the Holocaust and Germany's conduct during the war. The fact is: people in Oak Park had the (reasonable!) assumption that if you were allowed to immigrate into the US, you were not a war criminal. Clearly, once it's known that someone is a Nazi war criminal nobody wants them, in no small part because no community wants to be associated with the Nazis in particular, but yes also because Nazism is deplorable, and it is the law that Nazi war criminals must be deported. I can't look into the hearts of people of 1950-1980s Oak Park to know what they really thought or felt. I can't demonstrate what motivated them to accept migrants whether goodwill, humanity or any other number of factors. However, arguably WW2 caused people to be repulsed by the word Nazi, their actions, and their associated imagery, more than the nuances of the ideology itself. That incongruity persists, and there is still widespread ignorance about the connections - both explicit and thematic - between Nazi ideology and America's own history of racism, as recent high profile events in politics and society have demonstrated. > And I have no doubt that at every point from 1948 through 2024 that a Haitian immigrant would have had a far different experience in Chicagoland than a German one. That's my main point. It is easier for a person like this to pass in the specific context of American white suburban society if nothing else is known about them, vs someone who comes from a different racial and ethnic group. Conversely, it is not a coincidence that the false claims about Haitian migrants in Ohio were started by a local Neo-Nazi group. Overall, I feel Oak Park should be commended for how open and welcoming it was to this person, while not knowing his true history. The same charity ought to be extended to anyone fleeing strife and willing to work hard, contribute, and follow the law. (and PS I know I'm preaching to the choir of you).
  - tptacek 2y ago
    One bit of context I bring to this discussion is that I've spent 6 months reading the archives of our local papers --- not for this Nazism thing, but for work I'm doing on zoning reform (we're on the cusp of eliminating single-family zoning villagewide, which will be huge). Another bit of context is that there's a modern political dimension to some of the claims being made about 1980s antisemitism. If you're not familiar with Oak Park, it is very liberal; think of it as the Berkeley† of Chicagoland. There is a deep division between activist progressive Oak Park and normie Democrat Oak Park (I'm the latter), and, for obvious reasons, the last year that division has involved Israel and a rhetorical conflict between people concerned about Islamophobia and people concerned about antisemitism††. So, I read claims that Oak Park was distinctively antisemitic in that light. Generally, I think Oak Park was not distinctively antisemitic over the time periods we're discussing (1950-1980, when Kulle worked here, and 1981-1984, during which he was deported). It was better than most of the surrounding communities. But: everywhere was worse about antisemitism than they are now, which is a subtlety these conversations tend to miss. So, it's true that, for instance, both the private athletic clubs in Oak Park disallowed Jewish members throughout most of the time period we're talking about --- like clubs everywhere. The local council of churches, a player in the newspaper war about Kulle, did not include Jewish congregations (or Catholics, for that matter). The sort of ambient 20th century antisemitism you'd expect to see was definitely on display here. But Oak Park didn't see itself as prejudiced against Jewish people; in fact, a huge part of its identity, especially from 1965 onwards but also prior to that, was about us being at the vanguard of equity and inclusiveness. Soffer is right to take VOP to task for never living up to that narrative. But at the same time, you can't have that narrative and also actively hide a Nazi war criminal. I think the reality here is really simple: in the American system, it was simply not Oak Park's job to determine whether Reinhold Kulle was a Nazi war criminal. Everyone here assumed the federal government had done that job. Nobody probed Kulle; everyone accepted his story that he'd served honorably in the German army (he lied to immigration and said he served in the Wehrmacht, but the "Wehrmacht" vs "Waffen-SS" distinction probably wouldn't have even been legible to most Oak Parkers of the time, the way it is to us now). This is what historians are talking about when they worry about "presentism". † ironically, the muni that originated racially-motivated single-family zoning! †† :why-not-both:
shrubble 2y ago
The Haitians you are referring to are not here legally; they’re illegally in the country BUT are granted Temporary Protected Status; should TPS as a policy be revoked then under the law, they are not allowed to remain in the USA.
- scintill76 2y ago
  With TPS they are permitted to remain, so calling them "illegally in the country" is incorrect. Perhaps you genuinely want to clarify that these "legal migrants" (per grandparent post) are not permanent residents, but it's not a very meaningful distinction here[1], so your post comes off as trying to blur the lines in order to benefit right-wing talking points wherein they are termed "illegal" in order to dismiss their rights and evoke xenophobia. [1] The grandparent post was decrying those who would deport them despite their current permission to stay. The fact that their status could/will change in 2026 (the current Haitian TPS deadline) isn't relevant to whether they deserve deportation today.

by danans 2y ago

tptacek 2y ago

I'm pushing back on the idea that Oak Park was open to Nazis in the 1950s and 60s. It was not. What there was was a rapid influx of Germans after the war, and not even 1/4th the knowledge we have today about the Holocaust and Germany's conduct during the war. The fact is: people in Oak Park had the (reasonable!) assumption that if you were allowed to immigrate into the US, you were not a war criminal. Had Kulle been openly a Nazi during his time here, things would have gone very differently. But it basically never came up until the very end, and, when it did, people were extremely squicked out about it. For whatever it's worth: I'm guessing our politics are very similar. Despite the very grim consequences for some of the people we deported, I think we generally made the right decision to do so. And I have no doubt that at every point from 1948 through 2024 that a Haitian immigrant would have had a far different experience in Chicagoland than a German one.

danans 2y ago
> For whatever it's worth: I'm guessing our politics are very similar. I intuited that, which is a reason why I think this is a worthwhile debate vs debating with someone who doesn't have similar basic values about our shared humanity. Thanks for your thoughtful responses! > I'm pushing back on the idea that Oak Park was open to Nazis in the 1950s and 60s. It was not. What there was was a rapid influx of Germans after the war, and not even 1/4th the knowledge we have today about the Holocaust and Germany's conduct during the war. The fact is: people in Oak Park had the (reasonable!) assumption that if you were allowed to immigrate into the US, you were not a war criminal. Clearly, once it's known that someone is a Nazi war criminal nobody wants them, in no small part because no community wants to be associated with the Nazis in particular, but yes also because Nazism is deplorable, and it is the law that Nazi war criminals must be deported. I can't look into the hearts of people of 1950-1980s Oak Park to know what they really thought or felt. I can't demonstrate what motivated them to accept migrants whether goodwill, humanity or any other number of factors. However, arguably WW2 caused people to be repulsed by the word Nazi, their actions, and their associated imagery, more than the nuances of the ideology itself. That incongruity persists, and there is still widespread ignorance about the connections - both explicit and thematic - between Nazi ideology and America's own history of racism, as recent high profile events in politics and society have demonstrated. > And I have no doubt that at every point from 1948 through 2024 that a Haitian immigrant would have had a far different experience in Chicagoland than a German one. That's my main point. It is easier for a person like this to pass in the specific context of American white suburban society if nothing else is known about them, vs someone who comes from a different racial and ethnic group. Conversely, it is not a coincidence that the false claims about Haitian migrants in Ohio were started by a local Neo-Nazi group. Overall, I feel Oak Park should be commended for how open and welcoming it was to this person, while not knowing his true history. The same charity ought to be extended to anyone fleeing strife and willing to work hard, contribute, and follow the law. (and PS I know I'm preaching to the choir of you).
- tptacek 2y ago
  One bit of context I bring to this discussion is that I've spent 6 months reading the archives of our local papers --- not for this Nazism thing, but for work I'm doing on zoning reform (we're on the cusp of eliminating single-family zoning villagewide, which will be huge). Another bit of context is that there's a modern political dimension to some of the claims being made about 1980s antisemitism. If you're not familiar with Oak Park, it is very liberal; think of it as the Berkeley† of Chicagoland. There is a deep division between activist progressive Oak Park and normie Democrat Oak Park (I'm the latter), and, for obvious reasons, the last year that division has involved Israel and a rhetorical conflict between people concerned about Islamophobia and people concerned about antisemitism††. So, I read claims that Oak Park was distinctively antisemitic in that light. Generally, I think Oak Park was not distinctively antisemitic over the time periods we're discussing (1950-1980, when Kulle worked here, and 1981-1984, during which he was deported). It was better than most of the surrounding communities. But: everywhere was worse about antisemitism than they are now, which is a subtlety these conversations tend to miss. So, it's true that, for instance, both the private athletic clubs in Oak Park disallowed Jewish members throughout most of the time period we're talking about --- like clubs everywhere. The local council of churches, a player in the newspaper war about Kulle, did not include Jewish congregations (or Catholics, for that matter). The sort of ambient 20th century antisemitism you'd expect to see was definitely on display here. But Oak Park didn't see itself as prejudiced against Jewish people; in fact, a huge part of its identity, especially from 1965 onwards but also prior to that, was about us being at the vanguard of equity and inclusiveness. Soffer is right to take VOP to task for never living up to that narrative. But at the same time, you can't have that narrative and also actively hide a Nazi war criminal. I think the reality here is really simple: in the American system, it was simply not Oak Park's job to determine whether Reinhold Kulle was a Nazi war criminal. Everyone here assumed the federal government had done that job. Nobody probed Kulle; everyone accepted his story that he'd served honorably in the German army (he lied to immigration and said he served in the Wehrmacht, but the "Wehrmacht" vs "Waffen-SS" distinction probably wouldn't have even been legible to most Oak Parkers of the time, the way it is to us now). This is what historians are talking about when they worry about "presentism". † ironically, the muni that originated racially-motivated single-family zoning! †† :why-not-both:

shrubble 2y ago

The Haitians you are referring to are not here legally; they’re illegally in the country BUT are granted Temporary Protected Status; should TPS as a policy be revoked then under the law, they are not allowed to remain in the USA.

scintill76 2y ago
With TPS they are permitted to remain, so calling them "illegally in the country" is incorrect. Perhaps you genuinely want to clarify that these "legal migrants" (per grandparent post) are not permanent residents, but it's not a very meaningful distinction here[1], so your post comes off as trying to blur the lines in order to benefit right-wing talking points wherein they are termed "illegal" in order to dismiss their rights and evoke xenophobia. [1] The grandparent post was decrying those who would deport them despite their current permission to stay. The fact that their status could/will change in 2026 (the current Haitian TPS deadline) isn't relevant to whether they deserve deportation today.