Politics
Nazis stole this Jewish man’s Claude Monet drawing. How his heirs finally got it back.

This month at the FBI field office in New Orleans, officials turned over an 1865 Claude Monet drawing to Helen Lowe and Francoise Parlagi 86 long years after the Gestapo seized it from the home of their Austrian Jewish grandfather who’d fled with his family to London. According to The Times-Picayune, Adalbert “Bela” Parlagi, a Vienna businessman and art collector, tried and failed to get his art back after World War II. After he died in 1981, his son also failed to track down the art. Francoise Parlagi contacted the Commission for Looted Art in Europe in 2014, which set in motion the process that finally returned Monet’s work “Bord de Mer (Sea Side)” to the family’s possession.
A Louisiana couple bought the Monet in 2019, unaware that the Nazis had stolen it.
A Louisiana couple bought the Monet, which could be worth millions, in 2019, unaware that the Nazis had stolen it. Bridget Vita-Schlamp said she and her now-deceased husband were shocked to learn of the drawing’s history but “were quick to realize that it needed to go back to the family.” She and her husband “lost a painting,” she said, “but the Jewish community had lost so much more.”
Parlagi, who lives in Switzerland, told the newspaper that while she was happy to be getting the art stolen from her grandfather, the moment was also forcing her to think about the families that will never be reunited with the property the Nazis took, and it was forcing her to think about those of her grandfather’s era who didn’t survive the Holocaust. “We, of course, feel totally privileged,” she said. “So many families aren’t able to have this conclusion.”
An estimated 20% of European artworks, books and religious objects once owned by Jewish families disappeared under the Nazi regime. Approximately 100,000 of the 600,000 known expropriated cultural items remain missing.
As this month’s news out of New Orleans makes clear, even this far into the 21st century, we continue to discuss the material consequences of Nazi genocide. Those consequences included the destruction of Europe’s finest art collections and the death of Jewish collectors and artists. Restitution endures as a legacy of Nazi persecution and the Holocaust. Called the “last prisoners of war,” confiscated cultural property is a tangible connection to Jews’ families who were annihilated by the Nazis.
Two years ago, New York Gov. Kathy Hochul signed into law a bill requiring New York museums to display signage alongside works of art from before 1945 that are known to have been stolen or forcibly sold under the Nazi regime. New York is also requiring that artistic work created before 1945 that changed ownership in Europe while the Nazis were in power be entered into the Art Loss Register so people like Lowe and Parlagi can look for what was stolen from their families.
In order to legitimize the purchases of paintings for Adolf Hitler’s Führermuseum in Linz, Austria, Nazi leaders confiscated collections from Jewish-owned and state museums through economic collaboration with art dealers and auction houses that used other plundering methods such as forced sales and exchanges. Jews desperate to escape Nazi Germany and Austria sold off all of their cultural assets to pay the expensive Reich flight taxes for exit visas. Or, as was the case with Bela Parlagi, the Gestapo would seize those things left behind by Jews fleeing in terror.
Called the ‘last prisoners of war,’ confiscated cultural property is a tangible connections to Jews’ families who were annihilated by the Nazis.
Art dealers who bought confiscated art during the Nazi period disguised their complex business transactions and lack of clear title to the artworks by creating faux paper receipts and bills of sale. As a result, the ability to legally prove Jewish victims’ loss of ownership remains an unresolved economic legacy of World War II.
For several years after the victorious Allies divided Germany and Austria into military occupation zones, those victors had no policy for confiscated artworks. Because the Allies returned whatever looted cultural property they recovered to its presumed country of origin and not to individuals, they put survivors and heirs at odds with postwar governments. The U.S. military was not interested in directing or enforcing a restitution policy, as its primary goals were the rebuilding of war-torn Europe, trying war criminals and resettling displaced persons. For decades after the war, few wanted to discuss the Nazi crimes of stolen cultural property.
Jewish survivors, who’d been stripped of all legal documentation by the Nazis, struggled to prove they owned what had been stolen from them, as governments often demanded documentation including photographs of the art, bills of sale and an expert’s report identifying the art dealer and the artworks. Some Jewish survivors didn’t file claims at all. Others settled for less money their art was worth because of the impossibility of presenting full documentation.
Government officials made Jewish claims a low priority to avoid paying restitution to owners and heirs. Unbeknown to the Jewish claimants, there existed a steady presence of covert antisemitic beliefs at play. The same museum curators and art dealers who collaborated with the Nazis, falsified sales receipts and obscured provenance were hired by the governments to review and appraise the restitution and compensation claims cases. Governments successfully attempted to secure properties for the state, allowing private citizens to keep looted goods, while resisting Jewish restitution claims.
Almost 80 years after the Nazis’ defeat, we must recognize that every item will not be found and that moral certainty is just as elusive today. Bureaucratic delays and legal issues contribute to the claimants’ frustrations. Unless the items belonged to a well-known collector, museum or library, Nazi-looted Jewish assets can never be accurately enumerated.
Government officials made Jewish claims a low priority to avoid paying restitution to owners and heirs.
Common to nearly all claims today are the difficult and costly tasks of producing evidence that was destroyed or nonexistent and challenging evidence from governments and art dealers that was most likely falsified.
Behind words like provenance and restitution are people’s lives and livelihoods, their memories and their property. Lowe said her family getting the Monet back made her feel “emotionally connected to her grandfather.” Her cousin Parlagi said their grandfather “wouldn’t have thought this was possible.”
But it is possible. As we just saw in Louisiana, it requires cooperation among governments, auction houses, art dealers and museums. Each entity has a duty to help return the things stolen by the Nazis to the owners or their heirs.
Anne Rothfeld
Anne Rothfeld, an independent scholar, publishes on European history, including the collaborative roles of art dealers with the Nazi regime during World War II and restitution of stolen cultural property in the postwar Allied military occupation zones. She’s a research grantee/fellow of the Botstiber Institute for Austrian-American Studies and the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum.
Politics
‘Uniting anger’: Democrats fume over Schumer’s handling of funding fight
Chuck Schumer is facing one of the most perilous moments of his Senate leadership career.
The Senate minority leader came under heavy fire for the second straight day from Democrats enraged at him for backing a Republican bill to avoid a government shutdown, and fallout appears likely to last well past Friday’s vote.
A handful of House lawmakers, including some in battleground districts, are floating supporting a primary challenge against him. Activists are organizing efforts to punish him financially. Schumer is facing questions within his own caucus about whether he made strategic errors in handling the high-stakes moment and failed to outline a clear plan about how to deal with the complex politics of a shutdown, according to interviews with six lawmakers or their aides. Some Democratic senators are even privately questioning whether he should stay on as their leader.
“He’s done a great deal of damage to the party,” said Ezra Levin, co-founder of the liberal group Indivisible, which has scheduled an emergency call Saturday with its New York chapter and other local leaders to “seriously consider if the current [Democratic] leadership is equipped to handle the moment we’re in.”
In a remarkable sign of how deep the intraparty frustration with Schumer runs, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries refused to throw his fellow New Yorker a life raft. Asked by reporters on Friday if there should be new leadership in the Senate, he said, “Next question.”
Schumer’s one-time partner, former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), went so far as to urge senators to vote against his position, saying that “this false choice that some are buying instead of fighting is unacceptable.” And dozens of House Democrats sent a sharply worded letter to Schumer Friday, which expressed “strong opposition” to his standpoint, arguing that the “American people sent Democrats to Congress to fight against Republican dysfunction and chaos” and that the party should not be “capitulating to their obstruction.”
Though several senators said they supported his leadership, some Senate Democrats avoided questions when asked directly Friday about whether they continued to support him in the role.
“We still have more to play out on this,” said Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.). “So I’m not really thinking about the big-picture politics.”
Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) also dodged, saying: “The leader I don’t have confidence in is Donald Trump.” And Sen. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) responded to a query on whether he still supports Schumer by calling for a “good post-mortem” on Senate Democrats’ approach to the government funding fight.
“Anytime you have a failure — and this is a failure altogether — we as a caucus owe it to Democrats across the country and our constituents to look back and see: How do we get ourselves into this situation?” he said.
One Democratic senator granted anonymity to share private discussions said conversations are starting about whether Schumer should be their leader going forward.
“There’s a lot of concern about the failure to have a plan and execute on it,” the senator said. “It’s not like you couldn’t figure out that this is what was going to happen.”
The frustration toward Schumer reflects a boiling anger among Democrats over what they view as their party’s lack of a strategy for taking on Trump in his second term. Though few in Democratic circles think Schumer’s job as minority leader is at risk — and he isn’t up for reelection until 2028 — the frustration toward him spans the party’s spectrum, from moderates to progressives, both in and outside of Congress.
Schumer has defended his vote to keep the government running as the best of two bad choices aimed at not ceding Trump and billionaire adviser Elon Musk even more power to slash the government. Nine Democratic senators and an independent who caucuses with Democrats joined him to advance the bill, enough to prevent a government shutdown.
“A government shutdown gives Donald Trump, Elon Musk and DOGE almost complete power as to what to close down, because they can decide what is an essential service,” Schumer said in a BLN interview. “My job as leader is to lead the party, and if there’s going to be danger in the near future, to protect the party. And I’m proud I did it. I knew I did the right thing, and I knew there’d be some disagreements. That’s how it always is.”
He added that he is not concerned with his leadership position: “I have the overwhelming support of my caucus. And so many of the members thanked me and said, ‘You did what you thought was courageous, and we respect it.’”
But behind closed doors, even some longtime Schumer allies are raising the specter that his time has passed.
“Biden is gone. Pelosi is in the background. Schumer is the last one left from that older generation,” said one New York-based donor who is a longtime supporter of the leader. “I do worry that the older generation thinks 2024 was just about inflation, but no, the game has changed. It’s not left wing or moderate, it’s everyone now saying — the game is different now. But he was set up to battle in 2006, and we’re a long way from 2006.”
Adam Green, co-founder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, said “active conversations” are taking place among liberal groups about how to make Schumer pay. He said Schumer will likely face protests over his support for the GOP bill at his tour stops next week for his new book “Antisemitism In America: A Warning.” But he said the effort to hold him “accountable” will not end there.
“He has to be made an example of to enforce Democratic backbone going forward,” he said.
And it’s far from just progressives.
“I have not seen such uniting anger across the party in a long, long time,” said Charlotte Clymer, a Democratic operative associated with the moderate wing of the party who launched a petition to boycott donations to Senate Democrats until they force Schumer out as minority leader. “Sen. Schumer has managed to unite us far more than Trump has in recent months.”
After the GOP bill advanced Friday, Congressional Progressive Caucus chair Greg Casar said in a statement that “we need more leaders from the stand and fight wing of the Democratic Party.” MoveOn warned that the liberal group’s “members will be demanding answers from their elected officials” about the vote. The progressive organization Justice Democrats sent a text to supporters reading “F*ck Chuck Schumer.”
Also on Friday, dozens of protesters organized by the Sunrise Movement descended on Schumer’s office in the Hart Senate building holding signs that read: “Schumer: step up or step aside,” demanding he reverse course on supporting the bill. The group said 11 people were arrested.
“We have to reckon with the fact that young people, working-class people, people of color — the backbone of the Democratic Party — are moving away from the party,” said Stevie O’Hanlon, the organization’s political director. “Chuck Schumer is part of that reason.”
Still, some Democratic senators publicly stood by Schumer on Friday.
Asked if people are urging her to run for Schumer’s job, Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), said, “No, no,” adding, “I’m doing my job today.”
Sen. Gary Peters (D-Mich.), who is retiring after this term, called Schumer “a good leader.” Sen. John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.) told reporters he still has confidence in Schumer in the top role.
Others acknowledged the difficult position Schumer found himself in as he attempted to steer his caucus through a lesser-of-two-evils situation without the same simple-majority cover that Jeffries had in the House.
“It’s tough to be the leader,” said Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.).
With reporting by Emily Ngo and Hailey Fuchs.
Politics
Trump lauds Schumer’s ‘guts’ in backing bill to avoid shutdown
President Donald Trump on Friday congratulated Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer for “doing the right thing” by backing the Republican-led bill to avert a government shutdown, a choice that’s put the New York Democrat at odds with many in his party. “A non pass would be a Country destroyer…
Read More
-
The Josh Fourrier Show4 months ago
DOOMSDAY: Trump won, now what?
-
Uncategorized4 months ago
Bob Good to step down as Freedom Caucus chair this week
-
Economy4 months ago
Fed moves to protect weakening job market with bold rate cut
-
Uncategorized4 months ago
Johnson plans to bring House GOP short-term spending measure to House floor Wednesday
-
Economy4 months ago
It’s still the economy: What TV ads tell us about each campaign’s closing message
-
Politics4 months ago
RFK Jr.’s bid to take himself off swing state ballots may scramble mail-in voting
-
Politics4 months ago
What 7 political experts will be watching at Tuesday’s debate
-
Politics4 months ago
How Republicans could foil Harris’ Supreme Court plans if she’s elected