Persecution of Esperantists in the Third Reich and the USSR

It doesn't look like this really meets our requirements for book-like scope. It's completely unsourced and reads like an essay or original research, which are not permitted.This publication is a translation from Polish. Original address: https://pl.wikibooks.org/wiki/Prze%C5%9Bladowania_esperantyst%C3%B3w_w_III_Rzeszy_i_ZSRR. The author signed the entire work under the pseudonym "Benjamin E. Schneider". I decided not to translate the supplement. This work aims to present the persecution of Esperantists in the territories of the Third Reich and the USSR during the rule of Joseph Stalin. The author seeks to address this topic in an accessible, scholarly manner, drawing on authentic sources (primarily Ulrich Lins's Dangerous Language and others). We apologize for any historical inaccuracies resulting from the current limitations of our knowledge, and we welcome further editing. Origins Esperanto, published in 1887 by Ludwik Zamenhof, is an international language characterized by neutrality and relative ease of learning. Its primary aim was — and remains — to enable communication between nations and to promote peace and international understanding. Initially, Esperanto gained popularity mainly among intellectuals, young people, and socialist movements. However, the pacifist and internationalist ideals of the language attracted criticism from the very beginning, and its supporters were frequently persecuted. This work focuses on a particularly overlooked period in the history of Esperanto — the 1930s and 1940s. During this time, Zamenhof's language was viewed by totalitarian regimes as a potential threat. In the Third Reich, Esperanto was branded "the language of Jews and Communists," while in the USSR, after an initial period of tolerance, Stalin banned it as an alleged tool of espionage; its supporters were arrested, imprisoned, sent to labor camps, or executed. This work aims to provide a detailed account of the mechanisms of persecution against Esperantists and to show how threatening — even to totalitarian regimes — ordinary people united around the idea of international cooperation could be. Persecution of Esperantists in Nazi Germany Esperanto had gained a significant following in Germany around the turn of the twentieth century. During the Weimar Republic (1919–1933), the Esperanto movement flourished among intellectuals, youth groups, and left-wing circles. By the late 1920s, two main organizations existed: the German Esperanto Association (Germana Esperanto-Asocio, GEA) — a politically neutral organization promoting Zamenhof's ideals — and the German Workers' Esperanto Association (Germana Laborista Esperanto-Asocio, GLEA), more closely aligned with socialist movements and more active in scope. In 1930, the GLEA had approximately 4,000 members, and there were roughly 30,000 Esperantists in Germany in total. As the Nazi movement grew stronger, Esperanto came to be seen as a symbol of internationalism — and, in the eyes of Nazi ideologists, as a tool of the nation's enemies. After 1933, this hostility was gradually transformed into a systematic policy of repression. Views of Nazi Ideologists on Esperanto The ideology of National Socialism rested on the cult of the leader, extreme nationalism, and theories of racial segregation — all of which stood in direct conflict with the ideal of a borderless, international community as embodied by the Esperanto movement. Esperanto, as a neutral language without national roots, was perceived as a threat to national unity and to the notion of the Volksgemeinschaft — the German folk community. Initially, involvement with Esperanto was sometimes dismissed as evidence of "weak patriotism." Over time, the language became increasingly associated with cosmopolitanism, pacifism, and left-wing activity. The Jewish origins of its creator, Ludwik Zamenhof, played a particularly significant role in framing Esperanto within antisemitic propaganda. Although some Nazi activists reportedly attempted to learn Esperanto before the NSDAP came to power, this had no bearing on the official ideological line, which consistently treated the Esperanto movement as hostile to the state. The Influence of Mein Kampf on the Esperanto Movement in Germany Hitler wrote in his book: As long as the Jew is not the ruler, he must speak the language of the nation where he lives. When countries are under his control, everyone will have to learn a universal language (e.g., Esperanto!). Through it, Jews will govern more easily. Although Esperanto did not occupy a central place in Mein Kampf, this passage played an important role in later propaganda and shaped the thinking of National Socialist ideologists. It provided justification for portraying Esperanto as a tool of Communists and Jews — a language attributed in propaganda to allegedly "racially inferior" hostile groups whose presence in public life was deemed undesirable. The Nazi interpretation reduced Esperanto to a symbol of internal subversion and "Jewish jargon." This framing was deployed in leaflets stigmatizing the Esperanto movement, in party materials, and in public speeches, contributing to the social stigmatization of Esperantists and laying the groundwork for their removal from public life. Examples of Repression Against Esperantists After 1933, repression against Esperantists became systematic. Initially, Esperanto organizations were dissolved or forced to dissolve themselves, and their property — libraries, archives, and publications — was confiscated. Publications in Esperanto were censored, and teaching the language was prohibited. By the late 1930s, Esperanto had been virtually eliminated from public life. Despite nominal allowances for private use, Esperantists were arrested, sent to concentration camps, or charged with acting against the state — charges that frequently resulted in death. Members of the GEA attempted to save the organization by adopting a political stance and establishing a "Nazi Esperantist" movement; these efforts proved unsuccessful, and in 1936, the association was dissolved. Active Esperantists were placed under police surveillance, and their international contacts were treated as potential evidence of espionage. Those previously associated with workers', pacifist, or socialist movements were at particular risk. Esperantists were rarely persecuted solely for knowing the language — however, Esperanto activity often served as an aggravating factor in incriminating files. Esperanto Resistance Groups in Concentration Camps — Fact or Legend? Esperanto literature and the memoirs of former concentration camp prisoners make mention of informal groups of Esperantists operating under camp conditions. Although documentation of any formal organizational structures is lacking, sources point to the existence of clandestine networks based on a shared knowledge of Esperanto. According to Franz Haiderer, an Austrian Esperantist and former prisoner, groups of Esperantists of various nationalities operated in the camps, sometimes numbering several dozen. They conducted secret educational activities — language courses, handwritten bulletins — and used Esperanto as a means of communication and solidarity. This activity is best documented at Dachau, where a group of approximately 47 people taught Esperanto to around 70 fellow prisoners. Similar activities have been reported at other camps, including Auschwitz and Buchenwald, though such accounts are fragmentary and less well-documented. The subject has rarely been addressed in mainstream historiography. The Most Remarkable Acts of Heroism Among Esperantists in the Camps In the context of concentration camps, heroism did not mean armed resistance — it meant actions taken under a constant threat to one's life: maintaining human bonds, passing on knowledge, and preserving dignity. In this sense, Esperanto activity in the camps is regarded as a form of cultural and moral resistance. One documented example is Albin Makowski, described in Andrzej Pettyn's Skizo pri la Esperanto-movado en Pollando. Makowski, a Polish Esperantist, secretly taught Esperanto in Stutthof and reportedly compiled a complete Esperanto textbook entirely from memory. After the war, the manuscript was presented at the Warsaw Historical Museum as evidence of prisoners' cultural resistance, though its current whereabouts are unknown. Beyond this case, detailed biographies of other Esperantists in the camps are scarce. Available accounts suggest that educational and solidarity activities were carried out by many prisoners, but names and fates frequently remain unknown due to the destruction of records and the neglect of postwar historiography. A Survey of the Best-Known Victims Nazi repression affected both activists in Germany and those in occupied countries. Persecution was often indirect — Esperantists were targeted as Jews, leftists, intellectuals, or internationally minded individuals — but Esperanto activity served as an additional incriminating factor. Polish Victims Among the best-known victims is Lidia Zamenhof, daughter of the language's creator — an active Esperantist, translator, and promoter of the Bahá'í faith. She was imprisoned in the Warsaw Ghetto and murdered in Treblinka in 1942. Her sister Zofia Zamenhof perished in the same camp, while their brother Adam Zamenhof, an ophthalmologist and Esperantist, was executed by the Germans in 1940 at Palmiry near Warsaw. Their aunt Ida Zamenhof (née Zimmermann) also perished. Other Polish Esperantists among the victims include Leo Belmont (Leopold Blumental), a writer and translator killed in the Warsaw Ghetto, and Jakub Szapiro, a Białystok Esperantist murdered in 1941 near the Pietrasze forest. Leopold Dreher (Leo Turno), the author of Esperanto textbooks, was killed in Lwów; the journalist Edward Wiesenfeld died in a German concentration camp. Israel Lejzerowicz, president of the Polish Esperanto Association before the Second World War, also perished. Victims from Other European Countries Repression likewise affected Esperantists from Germany and other European nations. Many German activists were arrested, compelled to cease their activities, or sent to concentration camps; deaths resulted from the conditions of imprisonment, illness, or execution. Esperantists from Austria, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Yugoslavia, and other occupied countries were deported to German camps. Most of their individual fates are known only in fragmentary form; Esperanto activity is sometimes noted as part of their prewar engagement. This list is not exhaustive. The destruction of records and the deaths of witnesses have left many victims of Nazi repression nameless. Persecution of Esperantists in the USSR Initial Acceptance in the 1920s Following the October Revolution of 1917, Esperanto initially enjoyed a relatively favorable position in the Soviet Union. In the early years of the new state, the authorities took an interest in internationalist ideas, which aligned with the official revolutionary ideology. Esperanto, as a tool for cross-border communication, was considered useful for maintaining contacts with the foreign workers' movement and the international left. Throughout the 1920s, numerous Esperanto organizations operated openly, and the language appeared in publications, correspondence, and educational activities. The Soviet Esperanto Union (SEU) functioned legally; its members attended international congresses and maintained foreign contacts. Esperanto also featured in the press and in literature, and was promoted in certain circles as "the language of the world proletariat." During this period, Esperanto was regarded as progressive and modern, setting the USSR apart from capitalist states. Teaching took place in workers' clubs, cultural centers, and trade unions. Some activists believed that Esperanto would one day become the official language of the international revolution. Tensions, however, began to surface during the 1920s. The international character of the Esperanto movement and its members' independent foreign contacts aroused suspicion within the party apparatus and the security services. As centralization increased and the political climate shifted toward the end of the decade, early tolerance gradually gave way to suspicion — a process that eventually led to open repression. The Great Purge and the Repression of Esperantists The situation changed radically in the late 1930s, during the Great Purge. Political repression intensified, sweeping up groups that had previously been tolerated or even supported. Esperantists, who maintained international contacts and used a foreign-associated language, fell under suspicion. The Soviet Esperanto Union was not formally dissolved, but nearly its entire leadership was executed; the movement was informally deemed ideologically suspect. Many activists were arrested on charges of counterrevolutionary activity, membership in anti-Soviet organizations, or collaboration with foreign intelligence services. The repression was sweeping, affecting both prominent Esperantists and ordinary users of the language. Arrests typically resulted in lengthy sentences in labor camps or execution. In many cases, the only "evidence" was the fact of knowing Esperanto, corresponding with people abroad, or having previously engaged in legal organizational activity. As a result, the Esperanto movement in the USSR was effectively destroyed. The Portrayal of Esperanto Activity as "Espionage" A key mechanism of repression was the framing of Esperantists as spies. The security organs portrayed the international character of the movement as a cover for intelligence work, and the language itself was treated as a secret means of communication. Archival documents and memoir accounts repeatedly describe Esperantists as members of "a foreign espionage organization operating within the USSR under the name of the Soviet Esperanto Union." Such formulations preceded death sentences or decisions to exile individuals. Foreign contacts, participation in international congresses, and correspondence — activities previously celebrated as expressions of internationalism — became grounds for accusations of treason. Esperantists were accused of placing loyalty to foreign states above their loyalty to the USSR. By 1937–1938, repression had reached a mass scale. The only witness to escape the Soviet Union, the actor Nikolai Rytkov, reported that the authorities had targeted the Esperanto community for physical liquidation. Wartime propaganda during the Great Purge flooded the media with reports of "enemies of the people," "foreign spies," and "international conspiracies." Simply knowing Esperanto and maintaining foreign contacts was taken as evidence of subversive activity. Esperantists were classified as "socially alien" or as individuals with "international connections" — designations that amounted to grounds for arrest. Arrests took place without public announcements or stated reasons. Members of the SEU disappeared one after another, beginning with the leadership. According to Rytkov, virtually the entire SEU apparatus was eliminated — some were executed; others died in labor camps or in exile in Siberia and Kolyma. A particularly notable case is that of Ernest Drezen, a Soviet engineer and leading Esperantist who had been loyal to the regime. His arrest and execution came to symbolize the state's rupture with the Esperanto movement and demonstrated that even loyalty offered no protection. A Survey of the Best-Known Victims Almost all of the most prominent Soviet Esperantist activists fell victim to the repression. The symbolic figure of Ernest Drezen — an engineer, terminologist, and organizer — was arrested in 1937 and executed the same year. Among the others: Vladimir Varankin — theorist and author of the novel Metropoliteno, who disappeared following his arrest Nikolai Nekrasov — journalist and author, who died in a labor camp Viktor Kolchinsky — an activist who died young after his arrest Volodymyr Kuzmych — a Ukrainian writer who died in a prison in Alma-Ata Repression also struck Esperantists from the Baltic republics and political émigrés from Hungary, Germany, and Austria. Many were sent to labor camps or executed. Exact figures are unknown; Rytkov estimated that tens of thousands were arrested, with thousands not surviving their exile. Legacy and Memory The Esperanto Movement After the Second World War After the Second World War, the Esperanto movement began a slow process of rebuilding. Nazi and Stalinist repression had eliminated many prewar activists, broken organizational continuity, and destroyed the infrastructure of the movement in large parts of Europe. Recovery was uneven, shaped by the prevailing political conditions and the postwar division of the continent. In Western and neutral European countries, the movement gradually reactivated during the late 1940s. National associations resumed their activities, international congresses were revived, and efforts were made to document the losses of the war years. International organizations played a central role in reconnecting Esperantist communities. In Poland, Esperantists rebuilt with particular speed. As early as 1944, in Lublin — liberated by the Red Army — an Esperanto group was active. In 1945, the Polish Esperanto Association was reestablished (then known as Związek Esperantystów w Polsce; Asocio de Esperantistoj en Pollando). In 1946, the journal Pola Esperantisto resumed publication, and in 1947, Mieczysław Sygnarski published Kurs elementarny esperanto, pomocniczego języka międzynarodowego w 15 lekcjach. Political pressures subsequently slowed the movement's development, but it was never fully suppressed. Postwar Esperantists later found considerable room to operate within the limited openings afforded by the communist-era system. The Impact of Repression on the Language and Its Community Repression left a lasting mark on both the language and the Esperanto community. The physical elimination of activists, the rupture of organizational continuity, and the destruction of archives all weakened the movement for decades. The repression in the USSR was particularly devastating, wiping out the intellectual elite and the creative potential the community had built up in literature, technical terminology, and organizational life. In Central and Eastern Europe, postwar rebuilding frequently fell to people who had only encountered Esperanto after the war. The experience of repression also shaped the character of the movement in the years that followed. Postwar Esperantism placed renewed emphasis on humanist and pacifist values, positioning itself in opposition to nationalism and totalitarian ideology. The memory of the Nazi and Stalinist victims became a central theme in publications, memoirs, and educational initiatives. Repression also bred caution in international contacts and contributed to a partial depoliticization of the movement. In many countries, activity became concentrated in cultural, linguistic, and educational spheres, deliberately avoiding political engagement. Paradoxically, despite repeated attempts at marginalization, Esperanto survived as a living international language — and the experiences of the twentieth century became a cornerstone of its modern identity.