What Do the Hohenzollerns (And other obsolete royals) deserve?

[Ripster42]

31k died in dacau. Miss me with your bullshit.

From your own quote:

For a few months I was inclined to believe in National Socialism. I thought of it as a necessary fever. And I was gratified to see that there were, associated with it for a time, some of the wisest and most outstanding Germans.

Just because he regretted it later doesn't mean he didn't support them. History doesn't change because what you get isn't exactly what you wanted.

[Ripster42]

Did the currently alive members support Nazis? I don't subscribe to the concept of original/inherited sin.

Addressed earlier. They're not eligible to inherit anything their parents don't own. As the extant members of their family never owned the land, it's not a punishment not to give them that land.

[Ripster42]

I agree. I was really more speaking about royals becoming not-royals in general.

Oh, yeah. This specific case is basically a carve out for me.

Do these people, specifically, deserve anything? No. Supporting hitler's regime means you forfeit your claim to the lands you never held de facto.

In general, though, royalty does have a claim to some of their holdings.

[josykay]

31k died in dacau. Miss me with your bullshit.

Which mostly happened after Wilhelm II's death, after the start of Operation Barbarossa, and particulary after the Wannensee Conference.
Dachau was curel, evil inhumane. The structure, purpose and events happening in Dachau to 1933-1941 were substatantially different to the KZ structure employed in the Holocaust was all that I was saying. Not less inhumane or less evil. Just different.

Just because he regretted it later doesn't mean he didn't support them. History doesn't change because what you get isn't exactly what you wanted.

Indeed But I think regretting and distancing is still something to consider, particulary, since there were many more, who never weren't even bothered with that. Most wealthy or former noble families had some "support" for the Nazi party.. certaily more than for the communists or social democrats, because if anything they appeared of the lesser evil.
They should most likely all get nothing.

With an specific not about the Castle in Berlin:
If the should be compensated...
It is not their castle. It is a replica, build by the german state with state money, after the original was torn down by the GDR to build the Palace of the Republic. Either they are only compensated for the land the castle stands on in monetary values, or they pay the state the bills for building that shit.

[Ripster42]

Indeed But I think regretting and distancing is still something to consider.

That's great. I don't, and neither does the '94 law.

[minteK917]

Did the currently alive members support Nazis? I don't subscribe to the concept of original/inherited sin.

Then why should they inherit what was their fathers(talking royalty in general)? You cant be held accountable for a royal family crime and then you cant turn around and ask to get the benefit of a royal family.

[Ripster42]

"Family crime" is not a thing. Individuals commit crimes and should face the consequences for their own actions alone.

In general, even if your father was a serial killer, you should be able to inherit his possessions.

Only if the penalties/restitution involved in his murders don't exhaust his estate.

[minteK917]

"Family crime" is not a thing. Individuals commit crimes and should face the consequences for their own actions alone.

In general, even if your father was a serial killer, you should be able to inherit his possessions.

No, because royality lost their possessions due to the crimes.

[josykay]

That's great. I don't, and neither does the '94 law.

The 1994 law unfortunatly doesn't define further the definition of "Erheblicher Vorschub", which also makes the law by itself pretty vague resulting in the casa Hohenzollern in a long drawout, courtfight, of essentially state, who would have to pay, and House Hohenzollern, hire historians slapping each other nonstop with assessments on that subject.
The core issue here is, we have a familiy, inheritly antidemocratic, reactionary, but on the same time of only symbolic value. Not involved in the Beerhall Coup, not in governental responsibility like Hindenburg, Papen and Schirach, not in any legal position of power, not part of the Nazi party, who also happen do go in distance later.
It is not really a legal question, but a question of historic interpretation.

[ranzino]

Only if the penalties/restitution involved in his murders don't exhaust his estate.

thing is you cannot run a trial on humans already very dead for very long time, it is unconstitutional in germany. Hohenzollern will have a beef over the 94 law and poke germany to not hide behind "but but the allies decreed already". just wait for it....

[enigma77]

A firing squad

[Easo]

A firing squad

I love these random comments without any deeper context...
/s

[enigma77]

I love these random comments without any deeper context...
/s

It was my answer to the question posed.

Sorry you don't like it.

[Easo]

It was my answer to the question posed.

Sorry you don't like it.

But do tell me why should the current ex-royals be executed?

[Thekri]

But do tell me why should the current ex-royals be executed?

Presumably the answer to that question will be as coherent and well reasoned as his initial statement, so I don't suggest bothering with it.

[Themius]

That premise basically precludes all discussion. So lets just say I don't agree with it.

Do these people, specifically, deserve anything? No. Supporting hitler's regime means you forfeit your claim to the lands you never held de facto.

In general, though, royalty does have a claim to some of their holdings. The nonsense about "never really belonged to them in the first place" is just that, nonsense. Property rights don't just disappear. In england, the royals basically leased their land to the government. Just because it's basically a perpetual lease on the lands the royals get payments for that was signed hundreds of years ago (and updated recently), doesn't mean those agreements should be void. At what point do the heirs of jeff bezos get told they're royalty and are going to have their property expropriated by the state? When their taxes make up 75% of total tax revenues? Where's the threshold? How much political influence do they have to wield through lobbies before that's okay? As far as property rights, there's not really much difference. It's inherited wealth used to fund state functions which garners some measure of political control.

Why not? Why can it not be void? Do recall that the British deposed a King and replaced him with his daughter and William of Orange.

considering the horrors committed by them why not simply take it all?

It is not as though nobles, even royals haven't lost rights to their own lands, or lost their own lives due to their own treason.

- - - Updated - - -

If you agree that they got dispossessed then you're against the principle of private property. The state did not own their stuff, the state was merely an extension of their existence and their power. If you can rewrite the laws to disown the property of royals, then so too can we rewrite the laws to disown the property of the wealthy or anyone else's.

People's tastes change over time as to what their opinions are on who gets to own what.

But we aren't talking about the wealthy are we... we are talking about royalty. Property can be confiscated if say you owe a large sum of money, which you cannot pay.

I would say the damages of their family, the monetary value of that damage likely is far great than their holdings.

Treacherous nobles, if they want to hold onto old laws so much, treat them by them.

[JohnBrown1917]

Royality has no place in this world.

[Easo]

Royality has no place in this world.

Not even as a symbolic tourist atraction, which brings in that sweet sweet tourist money?

[zealo]

Not even as a symbolic tourist atraction, which brings in that sweet sweet tourist money?

You don't need these places to actually be owned by anyone but the state for them to attract tourists, it's more the historical building that has significance, and not whether it's currently a residence of them.

E.g one of the places these Hohenzollerns are trying to claim as a residence, Cecilienhof in Potsdam, a name that should ring a bell to anyone remotely familiar with 20th century history, is open to tourists right now pretty much year round for anyone who wants to see the place.

[Kasierith]

If they wanted to keep their stuff they shouldn't have given Austria a blank check to start a war.