The German Right from Weimar to Hitler: Fragmentation and Coalescence

2015 ◽  
Vol 48 (1) ◽  
pp. 100-113
Author(s):  
Geoff Eley

As archival scholarship on National Socialism moved under way during the later 1960s, study of the Right's broader intellectual history relied on a small number of then canonical works—by Klemens von Klemperer (1957), Otto E. Schüddekopf (1960), Fritz Stern (1961), Hans-Joachim Schwierskott (1962), and Kurt Sontheimer (1962), shadowed by Armin Mohler's Die konservative Revolution in Deutschland 1918–1932. Grundriβ ihrer Weltanschauungen (1950)—soon to be joined by George Mosse (1964), Herman Lebovics (1969), and Walter Struve (1973). At this stage, with the exception of Fritz K. Ringer's The Decline of the German Mandarins (1967) and Reinhard Bollmus's study of Alfred Rosenberg's office and its opponents (1970), there was virtually nothing taking a broader social or institutional approach to the contexts of Nazi ideology and the sociology of knowledge under the Third Reich. Gerhard Kratzsch's Kunstwart und Dürerbund. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der Gebildeten im Zeitalter des Imperialismus (1969) stood very much alone as a nuanced, archivally researched case study alive to the complex ambivalences of cultural nationalism in the Wilhelmine years.

Author(s):  
Anson Rabinbach

This chapter presents some chilling reflections that highlight certain continuities between the Republic and the Third Reich. It demonstrates how fluid and flexible Nazi ideology was in practice—so amenable to multiple interpretations and accommodations, in fact, that the majority of elites and masses could demonstrate fealty to the regime in multiple ways and thereby maintain a continued and even increased level of “normalcy” after the Nazi Gleichschaltung, notwithstanding the tragic fates suffered by too many of those who had once been citizens of the Republic. Biographies and institutional studies of the conservative circles in Weimar and the Kaisserreich reveal that unlike Soviet Communism, intellectual fealty to National Socialism required not so much rhetorical and ideological conformity as an ethos or “Gesinnung,” a willingness to adhere to the precepts of the worldview which was vague and indistinct enough to embrace a variety of related perspectives.


Author(s):  
Nitzan Shoshan

Abstract This article examines whether and how the figure of Adolf Hitler in particular, and National Socialism more generally, operate as moral exemplars in today’s Germany. In conversation with similar studies about Mosely in England, Franco in Spain, and Mussolini in Italy, it seeks to advance our comparative understanding of neofascism in Europe and beyond. In Germany, legal and discursive constraints limit what can be said about the Third Reich period, while even far-right nationalists often condemn Hitler, for either the Holocaust or his military failure. Here I revise the concept of moral exemplarity as elaborated by Caroline Humphry to argue that Hitler and National Socialism do nevertheless work as contemporary exemplars, in at least three fashions: negativity, substitution, and extension. First, they stand as the most extreme markers of negative exemplarity for broad publics that understand them as illustrations of absolute moral depravity. Second, while Hitler himself is widely unpopular, Führer-substitutes such as Rudolf Hess provide alternative figures that German nationalists admire and seek to emulate. Finally, by extension to the realm of the ordinary, National Socialism introduces a cast of exemplars in the figures of loving grandfathers or anonymous fallen soldiers. The moral values for which they stand, I show, appear to be particularly significant for young nationalists. An extended, more open-ended notion of exemplarity, I conclude, can offer important insights about the lingering afterlife of fascist figures in the moral life of European nationalists today.


2009 ◽  
Vol 37 (107) ◽  
pp. 138-162
Author(s):  
Carsten Juhl

A Manifesto in Danish has to deal with the Mother tongue and attack the Fatherland: Some preliminary studies about art and language presented from the point of view of the history of literature:The study follows five lines of reasoning: The first deals with the impossibility of formulating a manifesto in general; the impossibility of advocating the use of violence and on the other hand the impossibility of using dialogue. So the system of prescriptions and promises normally used in a manifesto no longer have sense.The next line of reasoning concerns the impossibility of presenting fictional preoccupations in the mass media and explaining why literature in Danish has to deal with its contents and form outside the current commentary and celebration hosted by the mass media. In this second line the Vico legacy is introduced to explain a conflict in Danish literature concerning its lack of an epic centre of historical and aesthetical understanding. Benjamin’s defence of the epicity in the work of Brecht is similarly discussed in this second part of the study. The third line of reasoning is presenting some older investigations on Danish prose into this question of what an epic dimension in the residual Danish culture might have been about in the last century. But all the investigations presented failed to get to the point. The point of dissidence was too weak and the point of national-socialism too clever to be manifest: It could easily hide behind the general cover up of theological aesthetics dominating Lutheran Denmark.So the fourth line of reasoning deals with political theology as a sort of interiorised state of mind in Denmark.The fifth line of reasoning presents two examples of something radically different and rather excluded in the political culture of Denmark: The Danish Council of Freedom (Danmarks Frihedsråd) during WWII which failed when it came to attacking the collaboration between Danish democracy and the Third Reich; and the Danish School of Writing (Forfatterskolen) which has been attacked by the local establishment since it was born 25 years ago.


2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 206-209
Author(s):  
Philippe Charlier

The problem I am interested in is above all that of the biomedical management of human remains in archaeology, these ancient artifacts “unlike any other”, these “atypical patients”. In the following text, I will examine, with an interdisciplinary perspective (anthropological, philosophical and medical), how it is possible to work on human remains in archaeology, but also how to manage their storage after study. Working in archaeology is already a political problem (in the Greek sense of the word, i.e., it literally involves the city), and one could refer directly to Laurent Olivier’s work on the politics of archaeological excavations during the Third Reich and the spread of Nazi ideology based on excavation products and anthropological studies. But in addition, working on human remains can also pose political problems, and we paid the price in my team when we worked on Robespierre’s death mask (the reconstruction of the face having created a real scandal on the part of the French far left) but also when we worked on Henri IV’s head (its identification having considerably revived the historical clan quarrel between Orléans and Bourbon). Working on human remains is therefore anything but insignificant.


2021 ◽  
pp. 268-287
Author(s):  
Helen Roche

Following Austria’s annexation by the Third Reich, the NPEA authorities were eager to pursue every opportunity to found new Napolas in the freshly acquired territories of the ‘Ostmark’. In the first instance, the Inspectorate took over the existing state boarding schools (Bundeserziehungsanstalten/Staatserziehungsanstalten) at Wien-Breitensee, Wien-Boerhavegasse, Traiskirchen, and the Theresianum. Secondly, beyond Vienna, numerous Napolas were also founded in the buildings of monastic foundations which had been requisitioned and expropriated by the Nazi security services. These included the abbey complexes at Göttweig, Lambach, Seckau, Vorau, and St. Paul (Spanheim), as well as the Catholic seminary at St. Veit (present-day Ljubljana-Šentvid, Slovenia). This chapter begins by charting the chequered history of the former imperial and royal (k.u.k.) cadet schools in Vienna, which were refashioned into civilian Bundeserziehungsanstalten by the Austrian socialist educational reformer Otto Glöckel immediately after World War I. During the reign of Dollfuß and Schuschnigg’s Austrofascist state, the schools were threatened from within by the terrorist activity of illegal Hitler Youth cells, and the Anschluss was ultimately welcomed by many pupils, staff, and administrators. August Heißmeyer and Otto Calliebe’s subsequent efforts to reform the schools into Napolas led to their being incorporated into the NPEA system on 13 March 1939. The chapter then treats the Inspectorate’s foundation of further Napolas in expropriated religious buildings, focusing on NPEA St. Veit as a case study. In conclusion, it outlines the ways in which both of these forms of Napolisation conformed to broader patterns of Nazification policy in Austria after the Anschluss.


2021 ◽  
pp. 46-64
Author(s):  
Edward B. Westermann

This chapter evaluates the significance of ritual and symbolism to the construction and manifestation of power under National Socialism. It underlines the importance of practices such as the mammoth party rallies at Nuremberg, the universal displays of the swastika on flags, pins, and armbands and the ubiquitous use of “Heil Hitler” as the standard greeting of the Third Reich under the Nazi regime. The chapter also contends that the creation of Nazi power was accomplished in no small measure by the use of ritual, and, in fact, ritual in the Third Reich served as an expression of “social power” that extended into virtually all aspects of German society. These celebratory events of Nazi power involved daily acts of verbal or physical humiliation of Jews, communists, and socialists, as well as organized and exemplary episodes of abusive behavior. Ultimately, the chapter studies the symbiotic relationship between violence, competition, and male comradeship and how it became manifest in the actions, rituals, and celebratory practices of Nazi paramilitary organizations through acts of humiliation by SS and policemen on the streets, in the concentration camps, and in the killing fields.


1999 ◽  
Vol 30 ◽  
pp. 103-126
Author(s):  
Maurice Williams

Friedrich Rainer (1903-50?) personified the semiautonomous chieftain who served the Third Reich so well. Born in Carinthia, he worked his way into major party positions in Austria and then, after the Anschluss, moved into crucial posts in the Ostmark. After leading the party in Salzburg, he highlighted his Nazi career by serving as Gauleiter of his native province. Simultaneously he governed the occupied regions in northern Slovenia (Carniola) and later added a role as Hitler's deputy on the Adriatic coast (Istria, Trieste, and environs). He was extremely ambitious, well connected in party circles, a capable administrator, a pronounced Pan-German, and a Hitler loyalist to the end. He also revealed himself as a keen observer of his surroundings, an active propagandist, and an able politician. In short, as a leader of consequence in the Third Reich, he did not differ much from other key Nazi lieutenants.


2015 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Keisuke Yoshida

AbstractDuring the first half of the 20th century, especially between the two world wars, the German-speaking countries experienced the so-called Kierkegaard Renaissance. Although at that time a wide range of thinkers engaged with Kierkegaard’s writings, Georg Lukács and Theodor W. Adorno argue that Kierkegaard exercised a particularly strong influence on fascist thought. Furthermore, Wilfried Greve claims that Kierkegaard was widely interpreted in the decisionist-irrationalist fashion during the Third Reich, which resulted in the appropriation of Kierkegaard by the ideologues of National Socialism, particularly by Alfred Baeumler, a leading intellectual of National Socialism, and by Emanuel Hirsch, a leading theologian of the “German Christians” movement at the time. In the present article I examine historical examples of the decisionist-irrationalist Kierkegaard interpretation. Then I discuss Carl Schmitt’s appropriation of Kierkegaard and the critical responses to it from Karl Löwith and Norbert Bolz. This discussion leads to the conclusion that the decisionist-irrationalist Kierkegaard interpretation takes on an “occasionalistic” character and thereby willy nilly renders the arbitrary or accidental content of the decision absolute. It can be maintained that this “occasionalistic” character of the decisionistirrationalist interpretation paved the way for a Kierkegaard appropriation favored by fascist ideologues in the interwar period


1969 ◽  
Vol 2 (4) ◽  
pp. 331-355 ◽  
Author(s):  
Herbert S. Levine

The notion that Hitler's Third Reich was a monolithic and efficient dictatorship has by now been safely buried, although it may persist in the popular imagination. This essay is intended as a contribution to the newer phase of the historical postmortem on National Socialism, the attempt to trace the precise mechanism of decision-making and internal policy-diversion in the Third Reich. Distortion of policy, as the result of disagreements among leaders or of bureaucratic sabotage, is a feature common to all modern political systems. In the grim context of the Third Reich, all attempts to distort or divert policy which tended to ameliorate inhuman aspects of Hitler's rule have been dignified by the term “resistance.” This study will show that successful local resistance was possible, even to the SS, perhaps the most powerful political force in the wartime Reich. The inquiry has its juridical aspects, since admission of the existence of successful resistance to policies and organizations declared by international and German courts to have been criminal, resistance even by those who accepted the basic premises of the regime, implies a varied distribution of criminal guilt. This distribution will not be attempted here, but the judicial analogy should not be forgotten. The historian is relieved of the responsibility of passing sentence, but, like the judge, he is concerned with more than the determination of individual actions. An understanding of the political system of Hitler's state requires as well an investigation of motivation.


2012 ◽  
Vol 5 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 120-247 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Schneider

Abstract The history of Egyptology in the Third Reich has never been the subject of academic analysis. This article gives a detailed overview of the biographies of Egyptologists in National Socialist Germany and their later careers after the Second World War. It scrutinizes their attitude towards the ideology of the Third Reich and their involvement in the political and intellectual Gleichschaltung of German Higher Education, as well as the impact National Socialism had on the discourse within the discipline. A letter written in 1946 by Georg Steindorff, one of the emigrated German Egyptologists, to John Wilson, Professor at the Oriental Institute Chicago, which incriminated former colleagues and exonerated others, is first published here and used as a framework for the debate.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document