Blog Post #1 Displaced People – Exploitation of Humans during Reconstruction
9/11/17
(Image: Migrant Crisis: A History of Displacement, Wall Street Journal)
Following the surrender of the Axis, the Allies were faced with the reconstruction of Europe and the staggering number of Displaced People within Europe. The two articles: “A Human Treasure’ and ‘In Wars Wake’ provide two very distinctive perspectives in how Displaced People were viewed. Within ‘In Wars Wake’ the staggering amount of Displaced People in Europe were viewed by President Franklin D. Roosevelt as “the problem of the human refugee” an issue that would fall into the hands of the allies following the end of the war (Cohen pg3). Many shared this perspective regarding refugees in Europe. “The Roosevelts were not lone visionaries. As the war progressed, a wide array of British and American politicians, military planners, and social scientists spoke of an incipient disaster (Cohen pg3). This thought process about Displaced Peoples was not held by all nations or individuals though.
In stark contrast to ‘In Wars Wake’, ‘A Human Treasure’ as the title indicates, portrays the Displaced Persons as a limited, yet highly valuable resource necessary for the reconstruction of war torn countries, particularly France. Due to the tremendous loss of life suffered by the French, “France required 1,400,000 to 1,500,000 immigrants in order to meet its future needs” (Zahra pg337). The answer for this demand and problem of re-population came in the form of the “so called ‘lost children’ – hundred of thousands of children who were separated from their families or uprooted by bombings, military conscription, occupation, forced labour, deportation, and the death of their parents” (Zahra pg332). These ‘lost children’ were seen “as a form of national property…and the acquisition of the productive and reproductive labour necessary for reconstruction (Zahra pg 334).
(Image: Refugee Childern, Center for Greater Jewish History)
These children and Displaced Peoples were being considered as a resource and a solution to the population problem plaguing many nations in Europe. What I find most alarming though, is the idea that these children are human beings being only valued for their potential to reconstruct a nation in shambles. There was no personal regard for the refugees or children as individuals they were only seen by authorities as a solution to their own population problems during reconstruction. Displaced Persons and the ‘lost children’ were exploited by the Allies “as a valuable ‘blood transfusion’ who could replace dead soldiers and thereby counter a ’menace of extinction’…”(Zahra pg 335). The exploitation of this vulnerable group brings makes me question the morals of Allied leaders during reconstruction.
(Image: August 1948, German children deported from the eastern areas taken over by Poland arrive in West Germany, German Federal Archives)
One quote in particular I found thought provoking was, “the child is the ideal immigrant because he constitutes a human asset whose value is all the more certain since his assimilation is guaranteed. It is impossible to say the same of any adult immigrant” (Zahra pg335).
I ask you, is this still true today with the refugee crisis taking place in the Middle East and Europe? Do nations and their leaders still consider humans and, particularly children, to be an asset? Should refugees only be judged based on their potential value to a nation, rather than a human being suffering from circumstances who are seeking a better life?
I really liked how you connected the readings to current refugee crises today. Many of the quotes from Zahra that you chose are very convicting, and show how children weren’t seen as people as all, but a number to fill a quota. I think the humanitarian aspect of refugees is often lost through events like these. The question you pose at the end is very though provoking, and I think would be interesting to discuss in class.
Overall, your points on the refugees being a “national resource” is very insightful into the morality of the time. I agree that many children were used for the benefit of others, as human capital, and not being given the help that they deserved following such a disruptive conflict. You also did a good job at picking quotes from Zahra’s article that truly showed her perspective on the cattle call for refugees. The pictures really cement the fact that her story is about whom she perceived to be the victims, the women and children, and represented that well.
How could we look at this differently? Do you think that this was an act of desperation for France? To rebuild what they lost? Perhaps, these “natural resources” were brought to assimilate and give opportunities children that “were separated from their families or uprooted by bombings, military conscription, occupation, forced labour, deportation, and the death of their parents”. What would have happened to them otherwise. I think they took advantage of the situation but could there have been any actual concern for the children’s well being.
I think that the way you contrasted the two articles was useful. I really liked that you used several pictures throughout to remind the reader that these are not just numbers in an article that we are discussing, but actual human beings who survived a terrible war only to face more abuse in the name of “their best interest.” I also like that at the end, you had a sense of modern significance to add in asking if this is still how we, as nations, look at refugees. Do we too often weigh their possible contributions to our nation against the prospect of supporting them? This is a hotly contested issue today and I think it is one that is worth talking about.
I enjoyed reading this article. I found it intriguing how you were able to connect the readings about displaced persons and refugees to current events. I liked the fact that you used more than one picture throughout the course of you writing. It allowed me to gain a better understanding of the readings and what the time period was like. You ended the article with a great questions. I do not thing that refugees should be helped just based on what they can do for a nation. I believe it is a nations responsibility to help those in need.
I would say that refugees from the current crisis are treated vastly more different than those in the aftermath of WWII. In the article “Human Treasure” it seemed as though only children were viewed as valuable immigrants and it said little about the adults. It also said that since they were young assimilating them into French culture would be relatively easy.