German Free Churches and the Nazi Regime

1998 ◽  
Vol 49 (1) ◽  
pp. 85-139 ◽  
Author(s):  
NICHOLAS M. RAILTON

There are a number of excellent studies on the Protestant Churches in the Third Reich, but none contains a thorough treatment of the smaller Free Churches. Ernst Christian Helmreich included a short chapter on these in his 1979 work on The German Churches under Hitler: background, struggle and epilogue. The recent publication of a work by Andrea Strübind on the German Baptist Churches, Die unfreie Freikirche: der Bund der Baptistengemeinden im Dritten Reich (1995), and by Herbert Strahm on the Episcopal Methodist Church, Die Bischöfliche Methodistenkirche im Dritten Reich (1989), should encourage research on a topic that has been badly neglected in the past.This article seeks to shed light on the relationship of German evangelicalism as embodied in the Free Churches to the mainline provincial churches as well as to the regime of National Socialism. It will show that evangelicals were actually far less united than is generally perceived to be the case.

2011 ◽  
Vol 26 (S2) ◽  
pp. 762-762
Author(s):  
S.M. Pereira ◽  
J. Bohun ◽  
S. Guimarães

IntroductionThe misuse of psychiatry by politics during dictatorships has mainly happened in the first half of the last century during the Third Reich and Stalinist period in Soviet Union. Even today the psychiatric diagnoses may be changed in an abusive way for politic purposes as they were in the past. This may undermine the credibility of psychiatry. The psychiatric professional organizations only recently start to discuss and investigate this issue.MethodsThe authors made a literature review in historic and psychiatric books. They also visited some memorial sites were psychiatry and dictatorship were sadly connected in history. Using as main example the abuse made by psychiatrists as a politic instrument in the Third Reich period, the authors aim to make a historic review about the relationship between psychiatry and politics.ConclusionAbuse and misuse in psychiatry may also easily be done nowadays. Psychiatry is a science with not so clear boundaries, what is normal or abnormal may be sometimes unclear mainly if not seen in a serious and ethic perspective. Because of this psychiatrists should be very clear about their position in ethics, science and society.The psychiatric professional organizations should face the facts of the tragic relationship between psychiatry and politics in history, discussing this issue more openly for an appropriate understanding of the past and for preventing new errors in the future.


2005 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 317-346 ◽  
Author(s):  
TIMOTHY S. BROWN

This article examines the life and times of Richard Scheringer, an army officer and supporter of Adolf Hitler who became famous during the early 1930s for his high-profile conversion to communism. Known in the closing years of the Weimar Republic as a point-man for Communist efforts to win support from the radical right, Scheringer survived the Third Reich to become a leading figure in the postwar Communist Party. His well-documented but little-studied career, bridging critical caesurae of modern Germany history, highlights the unique political constellation of the interwar period, demonstrating fundamental continuities in the relationship of German communism to the nation before and after 1945.


2018 ◽  
Vol 51 (3) ◽  
pp. 513-522
Author(s):  
Christopher Dillon

In their 1991 monograph on Nazi Germany,The Racial State, Michael Burleigh and Wolfgang Wippermann asked why it was “acceptable to use anthropological categories in the case of youth or women, and apparently unacceptable to employ them in the case of men?” The expansive historiography of Nazism, they complained, offered nothing “beyond an isolated venture into the realm of male fantasies, or a few studies of homosexuals.” The answer, in fact, had a lot more to do with scholarly motivation than acceptability. Put starkly, there was no intellectualfrissonin recovering the history of “men” as a social category in Nazi Germany. Influential asThe Racial Stateproved to be in driving the research agenda for historians of National Socialism, the authors’ ensuing chapter, “Men in the Third Reich,” merely confirmed as much. It presented a dry, empirical overview of Nazi racial and economic policies, excised of those specifically directed at women and children. The termsgender,masculine, ormasculinitydo not appear once in thirty-six dense pages of text. To be sure, this reflected the wider state of knowledge in the academy. Now, almost three decades later, historians can draw on a sociology of gender relations that was still in its infancy when Burleigh and Wippermann were writing. They study “men” to decode historical configurations of power. They no longer conceive of women, children, and men as discrete actor groups, but as protagonists in systems of gender relations. A sophisticated interdisciplinary literature has rendered men legible as gendered subjects, rather than as an unmarked norm. This scholarship stresses the plurality of masculine identities. It advises that a racial state, like all known states, will be a patriarchal institution, and that the gendering of oppressed ethnic minorities plays a key role in the construction of majority femininities and masculinities. By pondering the relationship between racial and social identities in Nazi Germany, Burleigh and Wippermann nevertheless raised questions with which historians continue to grapple. Each of the contributors to this special issue ofCentral European Historyfocuses productively on the intersection of gender, ethnicity, and power in the “racial state.”


2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 80-99
Author(s):  
Andreas Buller ◽  

This article presents an analysis of the diaries of the well-known German philologist of Jew­ish origin Victor Klemperer, who kept them in the Third Reich. From the perspective of these diaries, the author of the article examines the three central problems of the totalitarian language: the problem of its genesis and dissemination, the problem of the relationship of language with the ideology and morality of Nazi society, and, finally, the problem of per­sonal responsibility, especially the responsibility of public persons for the public language. Klemperer asks himself a question that we must ask ourselves as well: how can the language of a minor extremist (racist, religious, revolutionary) minority become the language of the majority? Furthermore, under what conditions does this linguistic change happen? Under what conditions does the totalitarian language emerge and spread? The danger of the totalitarian language is that it creates a seemingly legitimate basis to exclude a particular group or even specific groups from the society, thereby turning certain people into outsiders. The totalitarian language allows people to draw, mark and select. But behind this linguistic selection there is always a certain morality that implies concrete moral convictions and ethi­cal ideas. And so it was with the morality of National Socialism. The National Socialist morality was characterized by the spirit of racism and anti-Semitism, which manifested it­self primarily in the language of National Socialism. For this reason, we need to study the National Socialist language. But it also presupposes the study of National Socialist morality. This morality appears from time to time in the modern German language, esp. in the language of modern German extremists and racists. It poses a great danger to our soci­ety. In this respect, the study of the language of extremism can help us a lot, not only in or­der to recognize the close relationship between language and morality, but also possibly to avoid social catastrophes.


2021 ◽  
Vol 54 (2) ◽  
pp. 297-325
Author(s):  
Samuel Clowes Huneke

AbstractIn recent years scholars have shown increasing interest in lesbianism under National Socialism. But because female homosexuality was never criminalized in Nazi Germany, excluding Austria, historians have few archival sources through which to recount this past. That lack of evidence has led to strikingly different interpretations in the scholarly literature, with some historians claiming lesbians were a persecuted group and others insisting they were not. This article presents three archival case studies, each of which epitomizes a different mode in the relationship between lesbians and the Nazi state. In presenting these cases, the article contextualizes them with twenty-seven other cases from the literature, arguing that these different modes illustrate why different women met with such radically different fates. In so doing, it attempts to bridge the divide in the scholarship, putting persecution and tolerance into a single frame of reference for understanding the lives of lesbians in the Third Reich.


1999 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Christhard Hoffmann

A few weeks after the founding of the Federal Republic of Germanyin May 1949, American High Commissioner John McCloy addressedan assembly of representatives from the West German Jewish community.In a much-discussed speech, he emphasized the centralimportance of public recollection of the crimes of the Third Reich forthe political culture of the young republic. In particular, said McCloy,the relationship of West Germany towards the Jews would be “one ofthe real touchstones and the test of Germany’s progress toward thelight. The moment that Germany has forgotten the Buchenwalds andAuschwitzes, that was the point at which everyone could begin todespair of any progress in Germany.”


2018 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
Bronte Wells

Attempting to trace the intellectual history of any political movement is, at best,problematic. Humans construct political movements and the intellectual, philosophical underpinnings of those movements, and, in general, it is not one person who is doing the creating, but rather a multitude of people are involved; the circumstance of how politics is created is a web, which makes it difficult for researchers to trace the historical roots of movements. Nazi Germany has been the focus of numerous research projects to understand the intellectual roots of Nazism and the how and why they were successful in gaining and consolidating power. In line with popular theories in Sociology and History, earlier researchers have traced the intellectual roots of the Nazis in order to situate Nazi Germany as anti-modern, which by extension would situate their crimes against humanityand fascism in the same camp. In particular, Romanticism has been the movement that some historians have cited as a possible root for Nazism. The primary goal of this paper will be to disrupt the historical continuation argument, deconstruct the main parts of each of the camps, and provide support for the appropriation argument. This goal is designed to connect to the much larger debate of the state of anti-modern/modern of Nazism, and aid in showing Nazism as a modern movement. It is through researching and analyzingthe how and why the Nazis appropriated Romanticism that allows academics to study the influences from the past in the development of National Socialism, while accounting for the frame that the Nazis used to read the Romantics and the purpose for the way that Romantic literature was framed within Nazi-Germany.


Author(s):  
Michael P. DeJonge

This chapter begins examination of the third phase of Bonhoeffer’s resistance, beginning in 1939 and characterized by his participation in a conspiracy to kill Adolf Hitler and overthrow the Third Reich. Notwithstanding the novel character of this kind of resistance in Bonhoeffer’s resistance activity and thinking, much of his thinking about resistance remains stable in this third phase. As this chapter shows with reference especially to Ethics, the main text from this phase, Bonhoeffer remains committed to the two kingdoms, the orders (although these are now named mandates), and the relationship of church and state articulated early in the resistance. Similarly, Bonhoeffer continues to affirm the types of ecclesial resistance developed in the first two phases of resistance (types 2 through 5).


2014 ◽  
Vol 47 (2) ◽  
pp. 402-429
Author(s):  
Marjorie Lamberti

During his visit to the Federal Republic of Germany in the summer of 1954, Fritz Stern, a young history professor at Columbia University, witnessed in Berlin the memorial service for the victims of the July 20, 1944, revolt against Hitler. His feelings were stirred at the sight of the sorrowful faces of the widows and children of the conspirators who were executed in the aftermath of the failed assassination attempt, and by President Theodor Heuss's speech, recalling the anguish and courage of the Germans who made the decision to rebel in an act of atonement. Born in Germany in 1926 to Protestant parents of Jewish ancestry, Stern experienced racist antisemitism in the Third Reich firsthand before his family emigrated in 1938. He returned to Germany with conflicted emotions. During World War II, when the magnitude of the annihilation of European Jewry was uncovered, he felt intense hatred toward National Socialism. The distinction between German and Nazi became blurred. And yet, he could not bring himself to hold the German people collectively guilty for such crimes and to reject his native land. At the ceremony he struggled with his own feelings, saying to himself at first that “their purposes had not been ours.” Then a sense of shame for his indiscriminate hatred overwhelmed him. He left Germany in August “purged of hatred—though not disloyal to the feelings of the past, and full of forebodings about the future.”


2004 ◽  
Vol 37 (1) ◽  
pp. 91-114
Author(s):  
Roland Spickermann

In debates on the nature and degree of democratization in the Kaiserreich, the dynamics of rural politics have received perhaps less attention than they merit. Indeed, though the picture is more nuanced now, for a long period the ability of rural elites to dominate nonelites (a core aspect of these dynamics) was simply assumed, as was the relationship of this dominance to Germany's troubled democratization. In his 1943 workBread and Democracy in Germany, for example, Alexander Gerschenkron blamed Germany's entrenched and elitist aristocracy for this trait of bullying voters into antidemocratic politics spanning from the Kaiserreich to the Third Reich. More subtly, the landmark 1966 study of Barrington Moore, Jr. noted the potential for an alliance between entrenched aristocracies and small peasantries, with each as reservoirs for antidemocratic (and potentially fascist) sentiment in several countries, with obvious application to the German case as well.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document