Jews (who else?) object to returning Munich’s NS era art museum to its original appearance

Artist’s rendering of London architect David Chipperfield’s proposed exterior “renovation” of the Munich House of Art. Basically, he simply removes the row of trees planted across the front, post-war, that obscure the distinctive column facade, and widens the street to facilitate a more expansive view.


 by Carolyn Yeager

STAR ARCHITECT David Chipperfield’s plan to restore Munich’s Haus der Kunst to its original National-Socialist-era state has provoked blow-back amongst Jewish groups and the political left.

The 1937-era building sits at Prinzregentenstraße at the southern end of the English Garden and is scheduled to undergo the renovation work at the end of 2017. The Bavarian government has allocated €58 million to the project, with €20 million chipped in from the Federal government (totaling $83.7 million). Bavarian Culture Minister Ludwig Spaenle approved the plan, which has surprised many by being essentially a restoration of the exterior and surrounding grounds to its original National-Socialist-era state.

Haus Der Kunst as it stands today in November 2014. You can see how close the trees are and how they totally block the view of the pillars when leafed out most of the year. The area in front discourages pedestrians; there’s a one-way street and a grassy area, with lots of traffic and other signage cluttering things up.

Here’s a picture I found taken in summer – viewed from the Prinz Carl Palais. What disrespect to this building! For more pictures, see here.


Chipperfield said he wants to “reveal the past of the building” by removing the line of trees planted postwar all along the front that effectively obstruct the view of the 22 prominent columns and wide staircase from a distance. Instead of the grassy area now in front, the one-way street will be widened to preserve an open space that sets off the view of the facade, and is also in keeping with the severe classic style of the design. In addition, Chipperfield plans to open the doors to the English Garden as a kind of terrace leading into the green space. According to Spaenle, the design offers the opportunity for a social discussion about the “historicity” of the house, it being “highly charged with history”.

Originally called “House of German Art,” the museum was designed by Adolf Hitler’s early favorite architect Paul Ludwig Troost in the style of monumental classicism. It is a huge rectangle, measuring 175 meters long and 50 meters wide. Troost died in 1934. The grand opening of the museum was a major event in 1937, with Hitler and all the big-wigs of the Third Reich attending the “people’s art exhibit,” selected by a jury of Germans, not Jewish art “experts.”

House of German Art as it appeared in 1937, a gift from Adolf Hitler to the city of Munich where his political movement was founded and received its strongest support. With its strict classical lines, the building was a great early showpiece for the National-Socialist style of architecture.


Negative Reaction

Chipperfield’s team uses the words “visibility and transparency” in explaining the plan. Chipperfield has even been quoted as saying the House of Art had been “punished” in the post-war period, but there was “no more threat” [coming] from him. This sounds fantastic to me, but, not surprisingly, there are more detractors than appreciators.

Veteran Jewish activist Charlotte Knobloch (pictured right) leads the pack. As president of the Israelitische Kultusgemeinde (Israelite Cultural Community) in Munich, she announced “It would be a devastating signal to appreciate or glorify the old Nazi buildings.” She added, “I consider this backward-looking design based on the history of Nazi terror as history-forgetting,”

Another critic trotted out is Magnus Brechtken, vice-director of the Munich Institute for Contemporary History (IfZ), which is known above all for its research in National-Socialist history. He admits to also being “disturbed” by the renovation concept, saying “This is not the appropriate form of dealing with the legacy of the NS dictatorship.” He called National-Socialist architecture “racial ideology in stone” and said it required “commentary,” just as the scientific edition of Hitler’s Mein Kampf published by his institute a year ago can only be read with commentary. To present the building like it appeared in 1937 “would be similar to Mein Kampf without comments.”

What they’re really saying is they have to control the message.

There are others, but the most important voice had remained silent until asked to comment: Winfried Nerdinger, founding director of the NS- Munich, a documentaion center that deals with the “‘history and consequences of the NS regime and the future orientation.” As a long-standing professor of architectural history, Nerdinger is considered a connoisseur of national socialism in the “capital of the movement”. He was born in 1944, not insignificantly the son of Eugen Nerdinger who was active in the Marxist resistance against National-Socialism.

Upon request, Nerdinger commented: “The function of the House of German Art was to present German art for a racist, national community as an exemplary new construction of the Nazi state.” [This function cannot be] “simply ignored and rejected by an alleged innocence of the stones.” [The house was] “an architectural demonstration of the Nazi ideology and thus also part of the preparation of the Holocaust.”

So there you have it: This building paved the way for the Holocaust! National-Socialist ideology is criminalized – can be criminalized and can continue to be banned from consideration as normal German history – only because of the “Holocaust”, which itself is mostly war propaganda nurtured and magnified by the Soviet Union, continuing communist/globalist power structures, and World Jewry. The National-Socialist state has never been honestly demonstrated or documented to be bad enough/different enough from other states to remain the historical pariah it’s been made to be. That is accomplished by attributing the “Holocaust” to the National-Socialists

The “Holocaust” always pops up in the end as the zinger, the final shut-down when their political argument hasn’t quite carried the day. Everything the Jews and world-changers want is justified by the “Holocaust”, ultimately, and by nothing else. So why do so many well-known pro-White nationalists, identitarians and anti-immigrationists still accept that disgusting lie of German barbarism between 1939 and 1945? More people should be asking that question of them.

Source: Carolyn Yeager

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s