*The following was taken from a transcript of the Symposium entitled; "Hitler's Willing Executioners," sponsored by the United States Holocaust Research Institute at the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum on April 8, 1996.**
The year 1996 unlike any other in recent memory saw one of the most significant yet controversial explanation's for the genesis of Nazi war crimes against humanity and its consequent realization. Historically, this explanation centered around Adolf Hitler and The Third Reich. The focus now has been shifted to a new instigator; the German people themselves. Current opinion has offered the suggestion that the events surrounding the Holocaust were inevitable regardless of the political regime in place at that time in Germany. Inherent eliminationist anti-Semitism dating back two thousand years was the real reason these crimes took place and without this culturally accepted norm of behavior, Hitler's plans would never have come to fruition.
The purpose of this paper is two fold. Initially my goal is to investigate the issues as described above and prove beyond any doubt that this contention is false. A universal condemnation of the German civilian population is neither warranted nor is an accurate representation of the entire nation. Many Germans were not anti-Semitic, they struggled against Nazi tyranny and paid with their lives. The causes of Nazi genocide involved many variables, any of which, if not part of the equation may have averted these atrocities from ever happening. In this paper I will attempt to outline the origins of these war crimes and the methods used to accomplish these ends.
The realization of Nazi ideology resulted in the cruel deaths of over twelve million innocent victims. An unmerciless tortured demise through an inexhaustible number of methods including poisonous gas chambers; starvation in overcrowded concentration camps or ghettos; mass shootings; cattle car transportation; inhumane medical experiments and countless other forms of unrelentless suffering. Was eliminationist anti-Semitism responsible for this nightmare? Was it an intrinsic aspect of the German national character? This philosophy contends that the only appropriate solution to the Jewish problem (Judenfrage) is the genocidal extermination of the entire race. If so, one may argue that "not economic hardship, not the coercive means of a totalitarian state, not social psychological pressure,...but ideas about Jews that were pervasive in Germany for decades, induced ordinary Germans to kill unarmed, defenseless Jewish men, women and children by the thousands, systematically and without pity."1
The Jews, according to Daniel Goldhagen, the newest proponent of this theory and author of Hitler's Willing Executioners: Ordinary Germans and the Holocaust, had been viewed universally by Germans for centuries as the source of everything awry in society. Goldhagen continues to argue that it was in the nineteenth century that the concept of identifying the Jews as a separate race was first introduced to Germans and "dictated that a Jew could never become a German." Jews were "sub-humans" and a threat to German survival according to this racial anti-Semitism and calls for their extermination were dominant within German society as early as 1861.2 Goldhagen contends that German anti-Semitism was the most extreme in Europe and that the German people were unified in this conception. The conclusion that is drawn then is that the Holocaust was inevitable and the Nazi State was merely an instrument used to consummate German eliminationist attitudes about Jews.
The flaws with this line of reasoning are pervasive. Initially one must ask, if eliminationist anti-Semitism was already dominant in the nineteenth century, why then did the Holocaust not take place until more than seventy years later? Additionally, if the ideology of eliminationist anti-Semitism was so entrenched in German culture during the evolution of National Socialism why was it that in the Weimar Republic's last free election, 67% of Germans did not vote for Hitler?
Another important problem with Goldhagen's work is his disregard of National Socialism's master race theory and the biological and social engineering required by master race theory to design a racial utopia. Jews were but one of many groups deemed "sub-human" by the Nazis and targeted for genocide. The handicapped, Germany's own citizens of pure Aryan blood, were targeted for extermination. Dr. Eric D. Weitz, associate professor of History at Northfield, Minnesota's St. Olaf College recognizes that Goldhagen's "notations about the attitudes and policies toward the handicapped are quite wrong, even outrageous. He implies that the handicapped were not subject to intense and deliberate suffering and that they were a mere annoyance."3 Yet their elimination was as central to the Nazi project as was the annihilation of the Jews. If anti-Semitism was the sole motivation for the genocide which transpired during World War II, why were less than 50% of the victims Jews?
Central to Goldhagen's thesis is that a severe form of Germanic anti-Semitism dating back centuries caused the Final Solution to receive little resistance. Goldhagen fails to provide any substantial evidence for 18th and 19th Century manifestations of this type of eliminationist anti-Semitism because there is none. In fact anti-Semitism was much more virulent in other European countries. Germany had no scandal close to the proportion of the Dreyfus Affair like the French nor did Germany slaughter tens of thousands of Jews before the advent of National Socialism such as the Ukrainians did in the 16th and 17th Centuries.4 Institutionalized terror did not take place in the 18th Century against the Jews as was the case through the utilization of Cossack led pogroms in Czarist Russia and Poland. In fact, we will show later in this paper that there was a resistance movement that was not insignificant and was carried out at a fundamental level by German citizens as well as at the highest level of the Nazi regime, which included plans for the assassination of Adolf Hitler.
Christopher Browning is a Senior Scholar in Residence at the United States Holocaust Research Institute and author of the book, Ordinary Men: Reserve Police Battalion 101 and the Final Solution in Poland. Much of the evidence used by Goldhagen to support his argument was taken from Browning's work. Browning brought up some very important criticisms of Goldhagen's book during a Symposium held at United States Holocaust Memorial Museum on April 8, 1996. In response to Goldhagen's assertion that eliminationist anti-Semitism was a cultural norm unique to Germany, Browning describes the documented investigation of Luxembourgians who were successfully united into the Nazi death squads. These men had not been exposed to this form of anti-Semitism yet performed these crimes to the same extent as their German counterparts. Browning furthermore recalled cases where members of the Schutzpolizei risked their own lives to save Jews.5 Browning's examples confirm historical indications that Nazi social programs, propaganda, state sponsored legislation and threats of terror had more to do with the execution of these crimes than did inculcated Germanic values.
Finally, the consensus among most historians on this subject is that Goldhagen's crucial error was basing his entire work on the premise that these crimes against humanity were committed because of one reason and one reason only; eliminationist anti-Semitism. This monocausality dependence on eliminationist anti-Semitism necessitated that Goldhagen pick and choose his evidence, using only what supported his thesis and in the process disregarded some of the most important historical research achieved in the last fifty years.
The forces at work in a complicated social system cannot be explained in one easy answer. To be sure anti-Semitism did play a central role in Nazi ideology. National Socialism did exploit the sympathies of its citizens in using anti-Semitism as a tool for the acquisition of power. Without state-sponsored terror perpetrated by the Nazi conspirators however, these crimes against humanity would never have taken place to the degree that actually occurred. This paper will show that these crimes were an aberration in German history and not an inevitable consequence of eliminationist anti-Semitism.
One must realize that the citizens of Nazi Germany lived in a totalitarian state. These people were at the same time products of their national culture which the totalitarian regime understood and capitalized on. The values of this culture include perhaps the strongest nationalistic sentiments on the European continent. The values of Germanic blood and Germanic soil were ingrained in their belief systems long before the publication of Mein Kampf. In order to fully understand the reasons for these crimes and who is responsible, one must present a detailed explanation that includes these variables. After this presentation, the only conclusion that can be reached is that a universal condemnation of the entire people of Germany is not only misleading but morally wrong. The culpability belongs to the individuals who planned, created, implemented and executed these crimes and truly believed in the ideology of National Socialism and the reality of its consequences.
The exploitation of the German culture by National Socialism created a conduit between the values of the Volk and the ends to which Hitler designed. The citizens of Germany were told that Pflichterfüllung (fulfillment of duty) was essential to being a German. This duty necessitated the subordination of the individual for the needs of the community. Self-sufficiency was not rewarded if it did not meet the needs of the community. Hitler termed this concept idealism and characterized it as "equivalent to the deepest knowledge". "Idealism is inherent in every truly human culture and from its principles come the greatest achievements of mankind.6 Hitler's exploitation of the German culture proved to be the determining factor in enabling these crimes against humanity.
The conditions were ripe for Hitler's rise to power in 1933. The Treaty of Versailles had forced Germany to accept sole responsibility for the Great War and to surrender 13.5% of its territory, including 10% of its population (7 million citizens), 75% of its iron-ore deposits, its entire Navy, and all merchant men. The old provinces of West Prussia, Upper Silesia, and Alsace-Lorraine were lost. Germany was limited in its Army to 100,000 men and surrender most of its artillery. Not only were they were forced to clear a deep zone of fortification and not station troops on German soil West of the Rhine, the Treaty of Versailles also mandated that they accept foreign occupation of this territory and parts of the East. Other terms of the unconditional surrender included the prohibition of military forces such as tank regiments and air force; the surrender of goods in vast quantities and a requirement to sign over future commercial opportunities. Germany's assets were confiscated against reparation demands and delivery of reparations in kind and currency had to begin immediately. 7
Germany's economy buckled and collapsed under the immense burden placed upon it. Million lost their life savings through the devaluation of the German Mark. At the polls, appeals against Versailles, against the politicians, and the "criminals" who had formed the Republic always found support.8 After the crash of the American stock market and its consequential world-wide economic depression beginning in 1929, right-wing extremists received increased support from voters. The political Party which most successfully took advantage of these conditions was the National Socialist German Worker's Party, (NSDAP or Nazi Party ) which catapulted them to national importance after the Reichstag elections of September 1930.
Support for the Nazi Party was not wide-spread. At its highest, it remained under 38% in free elections. Coercion and terrorism were techniques openly used by the Nazis within their first five weeks in power. Intimidation and threats of violence used by the Sturmabteilung (Stormtroopers) resulted in voter tampering. Despite this, candidates from the NSDAP received only 43.9% of the vote in the nationwide Reichstag elections of 5 March 1933. Under the circumstances of authoritative rule, this could be considered a rejection. There is no evidence to advocate the assertion that the majority of Germans willingly supported the Third Reich, rather through the diaries of ordinary citizens and interviews after the war, state-sponsored intimidation and an extensive system of propaganda seems to be the most likely reason for public acceptance of Nazi programs.9
The process through which the Nazis consolidated power began immediately upon Hitler's accession to the Chancelorship on the 30th of January 1933. After the dissolution of the Reichstag through Article 48 of the Weimar Constitution, the creation of a police state was implemented through the Reichstag Fire decree 28 days later. Opponents of National Socialism were arrested and freedoms of the press and assembly were paralyzed.10 The solidification of a totalitarian regime was ensured with the issuance of the Enabling Act on March 24, 1933. Legitimization of the Movement was forced upon the German people through this decree giving Hitler dictatorial powers and pass into law any type of legislation necessary for the promulgation of the Nazi State. The Nazi social and political goal of "One race, one State, one Führer " necessitated this restriction of freedoms. Free trade unions were abolished, political parties (other than the NSDAP) were outlawed, civil liberties suspended, and opposition of every kind swept away. Loyalty to God, church, and scientific truth was declared incompatible with the Nazi regime.
The change from democracy to fascism was not a smooth, bloodless transition. The implementation of the Gleichschaltung (coordination) resulted in the removal of all government officials not sympathetic to the Nazi Party. All facets of political life were quickly controlled through an endless stream of decrees. The reorganization of the judicial system required imprisonment, extortion and execution. The integration of the Schutzstaffeln (SS) with local police forces gave Hitler the ability to perpetrate terrorism on his own people. The Brown Shirts (SA) facilitated the forced dissolution of labor unions through their attack and arrest of organizational leaders beginning on May 2, 1933. All organizations not affiliated with National Socialism were targeted for destruction.11
The success of the Gleichschaltung demonstrated that every single citizen of the Reich was a potential enemy if absolute compliance was not affected. Each citizen knew this and all doubt as to the repercussions of disalliegence were answered on June 30, 1934. The Blood Purge, also known as the Night of the Long Knives, resulted in the assassination of General Kurt von Schleicher, former chancellor of the Weimar Republic and Ernst Roehm, chief of the SA, who lost to Hitler his struggle for control of the army.12 State sponsored murder was legalized through a July 3, 1934 decree and anyone who challenged the authority of the State would meet a similar fate.
While genocide was central to National Socialism's goal of creating a new world order, publicizing this institutionalized mass murder was not. Public support for the regime was important and the threat of the Final Solution affecting the loss of this support too much to risk. Instead the Nazis represented themselves as the saviors of the Fatherland. They claimed to be the only alternative that could stem the tide against catastrophic political and economic ruin. They claimed to be the champions of German values and the defender of her honor. What they were in fact, were passengers of a propaganda locomotive who's destination was world domination.
As early as 1929 the elaborate Propaganda Ministry was installed as perhaps the most important element of Nazi strategy. Led nationally by Joseph Goebbels from its inception, thousands of Party members were involved in the dissemination of Nazi information. A chain of command developed from Goebbels down to local Party leaders that allowed for the adoption of Party themes to fit the specific needs of each community. Supplies such as pamphlets and posters were provided by the Reich Propaganda Office. The most effective method employed however was the political rally. These meetings used speakers that underwent a rigorous systematic training course, skillfully developing their oratory proficiency and knowledge of Nazi ideology.13 The topic for many of these speeches centered around the goal of transforming the economy into a productive force.
An ever-present entity presided over the order and discipline of these meetings; the Stormtroopers. These Brown Shirts served two functions. During the meetings, the SA ensured that there would be no protests, no difference of opinion. No one in attendance was permitted to provide any criticism at the meeting or else they would be forcibly removed by the Sturmabteilung. Additionally, their mere presence signaled to townspeople that an impending Nazi rally was at hand. Hundreds of these SA members would conduct impromptu parades urging citizens to attend the next meeting and apply for Party membership. These "propaganda squads" traveled from town to town, organizing and staging various events for several days before moving on to the next town. Music festivals, sporting events, hiking expeditions even theatrical performances would be used to promote National Socialistic ideology.14
Convincing the masses that Nazi ideology was the only way to transform Germany into a dominant power centered around two general elements. Propaganda focused on educating citizens that the Jew is the primary reason for the nation's problems. Just as important if not more so, is to influence each individual of their obligation in the success of the Movement. This was accomplished initially by convincing people that accepting Nazi ideology was in the best interests of the state without resorting to coercion. By appealing to emotion, not intellect, Hitler was able to persuade the masses to accept his vision for a new Germany.
The function of this propaganda is not truth, but convincing everyone of the ideas. These ideas must be transmitted to the lowest intellectual ability in order to reach the greatest number of people and must be "repeated thousands of times (before) the masses will finally remember them."15 The power of this type of persuasion is boundless and approaches a collective brainwashing. Hitler states that "with the help of a clever persistent propaganda, even heaven can be represented to the people as hell, and the most wretched life as paradise."16 Through this representation Hitler managed to attract followers in the millions who wholeheartedly accepted the aims of the Movement. The organization then stepped in and molded these believers into members who fought for what they have no doubt to be true.
The leaders of this propaganda machine included Goebbels; Otto Dietrich - Reich Press Chief and Alfred Rosenberg - Philosopher of Aryan Supremacy and editor of the Nazi newspaper Voelkischer Beobachter. Julius Streicher known as the "Jew Baiter" and publisher of the anti-Semitic Der Struermer (circulation 600,000) was perhaps the most notorious instigator of hate. As early as 1925 Streicher had called for the extermination of the Jews and through "his speeches and articles, week after week, month after month, year after year, he infected the German mind with the virus of anti-Semitism and incited the German people to active persecution."17 Even though Der Struermer and other publications suggested killing Jews, no Nazi publication ever reported on death camp genocide or related mass murder.
Every facet of daily German life was blanketed with Nazi propaganda. By 1934 Dietrich and his German Press Division controlled 3,097 newspapers and 4,000 periodicals having a total circulation of more than 30 million in a country of 17.7 million households. "We are therefore able to state authoritatively that at least three quarters of all adult Germans are, every single day, subject to the influence of the daily newspapers."18 The German cinema was also used as a tool of propaganda, most notably in Leni Riefenstahl's The Triumph of the Will. These films appealed to German values of family and the importance of motherhood; love of one's country and the honor of defending her in battle and of course the intrinsic significance of race. More than one thousand films were made during the twelve years of the Third Reich, with only a quarter created expressly for political reasons. Films of this type were decidedly unpopular, "even though SA and SS members were eligible for 50% discounts, hardly anyone saw (The Triumph of the Will)." 19
The constraints placed upon artists and their creations resulted in such a poor quality of work that it denigrated the culture. All literature, theater, music and fine arts were filtered through the Reich Chamber of Culture. Strict censorship, conformity to ideology and membership in the Chamber was mandatory. Using Hitler's theme of appealing to the lowest common denominator, aesthetic life digressed, resembling an illusory world free of the mechanized automation of the Twentieth Century. A melodramatic "Orwelian" society that shuns individuality and rewards obedience was inserted by the Nazi regime, creating an artificial society which was not representative of their talents.20
Another method used to garner support of the State were programs that actually benefited society and created an impression of advancement. One of the most popular programs introduced by National Socialism was "Kraft Durch Freude", or Strength Through Joy. Elimination of class society was the goal of this program where ordinary German workers participated in nationally sponsored events such as performing arts, adult education, folk dancing and sports exhibitions. This program paved the way for the average vacation day to be increased from three days to two weeks. Vacations and luxury cruises which were never available before were suddenly being offered to even the lowliest factory line worker.21 Owning an automobile had long been considered a mark of opulence, and through the development of the Volkswagen each German had the ability to be an equal of the German elite. This represented an integration of the common working man into the Volksgemeinscaft. The Nazi conception was to place the worker at the forefront of National Socialism and a symbol to the rest of the country of the commitment that the Nazi Party had in the success of the German people.
Perhaps the most impressive spectacle of Nazi propaganda was the pageantry of the mass rally. Attended in many instances by over 100,000 Party members, every last detail was orchestrated to perfection. These meetings began at 8 p.m. because "man's suggestibility was high and his resistance at its lowest ebb." Artificial lighting was not permitted, hundreds of torches illuminated the night's sky giving the rally a surrealistic, almost religious significance. Parades of uniformed men chanting songs and carrying Swastika flags marched in unison to the bugles and drums of Nazi bands. Under this aura of breath-taking emotion, Hitler or one of the other high ranking Party members, began their oratory in a slow, methodical, steady pace highlighting significant passages with rehearsed body movements.22 As a gradual crescendo of sight and sound reached its zenith, an incited mass of hysteria was produced so intense, that if ideological belief was not forthcoming, peer pressure would frequently guarantee conformity.
Propaganda was the instrument used to convince the masses in the war against the Jews. Dietriech ordered that "newspapers will receive a Jewish theme daily, one that should be used only to incite."23 Initially declaring that the Jew is "sub-human", Streicher subsequently reinvented his characterization, calling the Jew the devil. Lies in the press about the Jew were not only encouraged but required. An example of these outrageous accusations was the 1943 "Jewish-Bolshevik mass murder of 12,000 Polish officers in the forest of Katyn."24 Jewish ritual murder was also a theme constantly revisited not only in the press, but in education and religious institutions as well. A typical anti-Semitic article might begin something like this:
The Jew is a cultural destroyer. A war-mongering criminal who usurps power from innocents, naive of his true intentions. They murder in the name of their religion, practice slave trading and are known perverted sex offenders. They are morally degenerate, opposed to every aspect of German life and a poisoner of the Aryan race. They are the antithesis of German idealism. They are the creators of the twin evils of communism and democracy. They have therefore declared war upon us and our way of life and the only recourse is to fight back through the annihilation of the entire race.
While eliminationist anti-Semitism was not an inherent German value, it was an intrinsic part of National Socialism. National Socialism would not have succeeded to the extent that it did without anti-Semitism. The choice to resist this type of thinking for most Germans was like trying to survive a tidal wave in an inflatable tube. Nonetheless, many Germans did resist the Nazi Movement.
Organized opposition brought with it the knowledge of varying degrees of risk and the potential for grave consequences. Some paid with their lives for refusing to use the greeting 'Heil Hitler', or for pessimistic remarks regarding Germany's role in the war.25 Understandably, few had the courage to defy the State on any level, especially after the first two years of Nazi rule. Popular opposition was easily controlled by the threat of arrest and imprisonment in newly formed labor camps that housed political opponents among other undesirables. The criticism of either the regime or its representatives was forbidden. Even dissent from Party doctrine could lead to a Gestapo investigation. The Gestapo (Secret Service Police) served as the ultimate weapon of fear within the State. It not only searched and destroyed serious threats to the regime, but it also tried to suppress all non-compliance by the population. This threat reduced any possibility of disobedience, all of which were characterized as 'opposition' and therefore criminalized. There emerged a surveillance society which imposed upon itself the strictest of parameters.26 General surveillance was felt to be so inescapable that it was difficult for any defiance to be expressed, let alone any resistance to materialize.
Facing certain death is a large deterrent, but there were still many Germans who voiced their opposition. Disorganized as they were, the activities ranged from various attempted assassinations, distribution of leaflets, helping Jews hide, and a simple refusal to fly the swastika flag. All of these could and did result in death, as Ewals von Kleist-Schmenzi learned. In 1933, he told the Nazi Party District Leader that he was an enemy of the Party; he would neither say 'Heil Hitler', show the swastika flag nor give money to the Party ; not even a token 10 pennies. He was hung for his opposition.27 Some of the main reasons for resistance included ideological differences, dictatorial oppression, the fear of war, police excess, persecution of religious leaders and the persecution of non-Aryans (Jews and Gypsies in particular). For many, the persecution of the Jews was the most important single factor. In working class groups, the main display of resistance was in the disbursement of anti-government leaflets. This was considered high treason and punishable by prison term or death. Gestapo estimates after the war revealed that 1,643,000 leaflets had been distributed illegally. The people slowly realized the price of free speech - concentration camp or prison. Verbal opposition was ineffective and after a few months, that too was muted. The next phase was the underground movement.28
The White Rose Society, a predominantly student organization, is a famous example of an underground Nazi resistance group. They were so called perhaps because the rose was a symbol of secrecy and white might reflect the fact that their leaflets were not influenced by any color of political thought. The principle figures in the Society were a brother and sister by the names of Hans and Sophie Scholl, both students. At first the children were active participants in the Hitler Youth organizations, but they soon realized the full scale of Hitler's programs when news of the concentration camps spread to them. The end of his participation in the Hitler Youth came after Hans hit a senior Hitler Youth official after an altercation involving the carrying of the swastika flag. His sister soon followed his lead. Sophie was a pacifist, refusing to donate warm clothing for the German soldiers in the hope that the war would end faster if they, or the Russians froze. The two felt that they had to take some stand against the regime. Hans wanted to influence people's minds against Nazism and militarism with no intentions of violence themselves. The first four leaflets appeared in June and July 1942. They were written by Hans Scholl with Alexander Schmorell and Cristoph Probst. The leaflets included such remarks as "Nothing is less worthy of a cultivated people than to allow itself to be governed by a clique of irresponsible bandits of dark ambition, without resistance".29 They talked about the murder of Jews in Poland, encouraged sabotage in the armaments industry and criticized the anti-Christian and anti-social aspects of the war. They distributed their leaflets by the suitcase-load in towns all over Germany. They either carried them themselves, delivered them by train to other parts of Germany, or copied addresses out of phone books.
A student demonstration in reaction to Nazi ideology was launched soon after a 13 January 1943 speech by Paul Giesler, a District Leader of the city's Nazi Party. In this speech he encouraged all female students to give the Führer a child rather than waste their time on books. This demonstration motivated the Gestapo to redouble its efforts to find the originators of the White Rose. On 18 February 1943 Hans and Sophie decided to distribute the newest pamphlets to the University themselves. They spread them everywhere they could. Just as they were done, the doors of the lecture halls opened, but they had been seen. They were seized and placed under arrest. They were taken to Gestapo headquarters. They were interrogated for four days, betraying no one. They were tried on 22 February, and were sentenced along with Cristoph Probst, to death by the guillotine and were killed that night. 30
One of the most popular forms of resistance was the aiding of Jews in escaping from the country. Hans von Dohnanyi formed one of the most active centers in Germany. They organized an underground railroad in 1941-1942 for Jews to escape from Germany and thereby avoid deportation to a death camp. The SS learned of the railroad and several members of the group were hung in April of 1945.31
Resistance among the intellectual community and within Hitler's own ranks was recognized. Although these groups may have had anti-Semites as members, and who's motivation may have been more political than moral, these were individuals who were opposed to the Final Solution and other war crimes. The Kreisau Circle was an opposition group that aimed to ensure that when the Nazi tyranny was overthrown, a body of men would be ready to take over the government and lead it back to the European community of nations. Among those they tries to help were the persecuted inside the prisons, members of forbidden sects such as the Jehovah's Witnesses, pastors of the confessing Church and individuals who had refused to do military service or to take the oath of loyalty to Hitler.32 They had no doubt that the regime would end, and did not want to be caught unprepared. Originally, they were opposed to the idea of assassination, but as time went on, they turned to the more desperate measure.33
The central figure of the Kreisau Circle was Count Helmuth von Moltke. Two secondary circles were formed within the larger one; the other lead by Peter Count Yorck von Wartenburg. The group was very diverse, including among its members Protestants, Jesuits, Catholic, and Socialists. They planned their first coup in 1938, hoping that the marching of German troops into Czechoslovakia would spur others to take action, but external developments made it impossible. The circle was divided into several "working groups" assigned to a particular aspect such as cultural policy, economy, agriculture and foreign policy. This was done largely as a safety measure. Members rarely knew each others names and were specialized in one field so that if they were arrested, they would only give away small amounts of information
At the beginning of October, 1943, Claus Schenj Count von Stauffenberg, a relative of Yorck, took duty as Chief of Staff in the General Office in Berlin. The circle gained association with him. When its activities came to a halt with the arrest of Moltke in January 1944, most of the members began to sympathize with the idea of assassination. Stauffenberg gained rank and was one part of a limited group of persons who occasionally made reports to the Hitler at the Führer's Headquarters in East Prussia. This gave him the opportunity to perform the assassination attempt himself. On July 6, he took with him a packet containing explosives to a conference attended by Hitler, but was not able to attempt the assassination. A deadline of the 20th of July was created because it was believed that it was not possible to wait longer.
On the 20th of July, while Stauffernberg was at the Führer's Headquarters', Yorck and others waited for him in his office. Later, when rumors of the failure of the attempt became reality, they separated to avoid suspicion. Still, almost all of the members were arrested. An extensive man-hunt began and according to Gestapo sources, at least 7,000 persons were arrested. Most of the leaders were hung, with the exception of three who escaped.34
These crimes against humanity were not inevitable but were the actualization of the horrific dreams of a madman. Dreams that were extensions of belief systems ingrained in Germanic values, but not unique to them alone. A complicated combination of circumstances allowed for these events to unfold the way they did. Many scholars have pointed to the Treaty of Versailles and hypothesize whether its absence would have negated the birth of the Reich. A larger readership of Mein Kampf (especially by the Allied leadership) may have stopped Hitler before he got started.
The question was asked, "what if a family living next to Dachau Concentration Camp knew about the atrocities being committed yet did nothing to stop them, are they culpable?" In response one must ask: "what would be the most that they could have done?" Did they have access to bombs, could they have transmitted information to an underground resistance group? Life in the totalitarian state would permit very little of these things to occur. If they did it would be an isolated incident with little chance of success. It would provide an inconvenience similar to a mosquito on the back of Hitler's neck. To attempt such a deed would be heroic, but not to attempt this does not an accomplice make.
A sentiment found on the part of many Germans is "although (Hitler) went too far with the ideas of conquest, he was basically right on the Jewish problem."35 These family members are morally wrong but are not guilty of any crime if they fully agreed with National Socialistic ideology yet did not participate in any war crimes. Although this is but one factor which facilitated the fulfillment of these crimes, mere thoughts have never been crimes in civilized countries and we are worse than Nazis when we say otherwise.
Alexander G. Hardy, United States Prosecutor and Chief Trial Counsel for the Press and Propaganda Case at the Nuerenberg War Crimes Trials believes in a collective guilt of the German people for crimes against humanity. "I cannot recognize or accept the premise so often advanced that the German people could do nothing about it...only by the collective guilt of the German people could this nightmare of history ever have taken place."36 Mr. Hardy has the advantage of historical hindsight as his administrator of justice. What he neglects to take into consideration is that when Mein Kampf was first released, "the average party member did not read the book and among it's leaders it was a common saying that Hitler was an extraordinary speaker...but 'it's too bad that he wrote that silly book.'37 This manifesto for world-wide domination and destruction was not a best seller until Hitler's role as fascist dictator was secured. There was nothing that could be done to prevent this.
Guilt by association has never been sufficient for conviction in American jurisprudence and that may be a reason why we are inclined against a universal condemnation. Blaming the country as a whole is unproductive in the creation of a new Germany. Our assignment of guilt is not as significant as the lessons learned so that something like this never happens again. Instead each individual who endorsed these sordid ideas must live with themselves and what these ideas did to Germany. They are the ones who are tortured by the deceit and demise of their beloved Führer; destruction of the Third Reich; the bisection of the Fatherland with one-half succumbing to communism and finally their greatest torment, the creation of a Jewish nation.
The Nazis did exploit anti-Semitism, but this anti-Semitism was not of the Sonderwig variety that theorizes Germany's anti-Semitism was unique. It certainly wasn't all pervasive. Theodore Fritsch, a noted anti-Semite of late 19th and early 20th Century Germany estimates that 5% of the country voted for anti-Semitic candidates in the Reichstag elections of 1893.38 It was through the Nazis exploitation of anti-Semitism in addition to their exploitation of Germanic values, combined with life in the totalitarian state that paralyzed the German citizen's ability to act upon any individual morality.
Germany has felt a national guilt over the atrocities for a very long time. A guilt that could only be placed upon them by them themselves. A shame that prevented public discussion of the subject for decades. A humiliation for the deeds of their grandfathers that is harder and harder for them to identify with. The German people make up a proud country who now understand all too clearly the significance of individual freedom and the value of individual responsibility. This responsibility with the individual is fully sufficient in the atonement for each of their sins.
© 1998 All Rights Reserved.
1. Goldhagen, Daniel, Hitler's Willing Executioners: Ordinary Germans and the Holocaust, Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., 1996, p. 9.
2. ibid., p. 71.
3. Taken from a transcript of the Symposium entitled Hitler's Willing Executioners sponsored by the United States Holocaust Research Institute at the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum on April 8, 1996. http://www.ushmm.org/research/ Goldhagen.html
4. Lecture 11/18/95
5. Taken from a transcript of the Symposium entitled Hitler's Willing Executioners sponsored by the United States Holocaust Research Institute at the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum on April 8, 1996. http://www.ushmm.org/research/ Goldhagen.html.
6. Hitler, Adolf, Mein Kampf, Translated by Ralph Manheim, Houghton Mifflin Company: Boston, 1971, pg. 298.
7. Hoffman, Peter, German Resistance to Hitler, Harvard University Press: Cambridge, 1988. Pg. 7-9.
8. Ibid., pg.10.
9. Ibid., pg.12.
10. Sax, Benjamin; Kuntz, Dieter, Inside Hitler's Germany: A Documentary History of Life in the Third Reich, D.C. Heath and Company: Lexington, MA, 1992, pg. 134.
11. Ibid., pg.128.
12. Ibid., pg.154.
13. Ibid., pg. 98.
14. Ibid.
15. Hardy, Alexander G., Hitler's Secret Weapon: "The Managed" Press and Propaganda Machine of Nazi Germany, Vantage Press: New York, 1967, pg.17
16. ibid., pg. 15.
17. ibid., pg. 83.
18. ibid., pg. 59.
19. Sax, Benjamin; Kuntz, Dieter, Inside Hitler's Germany: A Documentary History of Life in the Third Reich, D.C. Heath and Company: Lexington, MA, 1992, pg.236.
20. ibid., pg. 224.
21. ibid., pg. 255.
22. Hardy, Alexander G., Hitler's Secret Weapon: "The Managed" Press and Propaganda Machine of Nazi Germany, Vantage Press: New York, 1967, pg.88.
23. ibid., pg. 207.
24. ibid., pg. 204.
25. Stokes, Lawrence; Stokes, Lawrence and Nicosa, Francis, ed.,Germans Against Nazism: Non-Conformity, Opposition and Resistance in the Third Reich: In Honor of Peter Hoffman, St. Martin's Press: Canada, 1987, pg. 7-10.
26. Crankshaw, Edward, Gestapo: Instrument of Tyranny, The Viking Press: New York, 1966, p.122.
27. Hoffman, Peter, The History of the German Resistance 1933-1945, MIT Press: Cambridge, 1979, p.53.
28. ibid. 29. Deuel, Wallace, People Under Hitlerr, Wallace and Company, New York, 1942, pg.139-141.
30. ibid., pg. 152. 31. van Roon, Ger, German Resistance to Hitler, Count von Moltke and the Kreisau Circle, Van Nostrand Reinhold Company: London, 1971, pg.114.
32. ibid., pg. 169. 33. van Roon, Ger, German Resistance to Hitler, Count von Moltke and the Kreisau Circle, Van Nostrand Reinhold Company: London, 1971, pg.7.
34. ibid., pg. 140-168. 35. Hardy, Alexander G., Hitler's Secret Weapon: "The Managed" Press and Propaganda Machine of Nazi Germany, Vantage Press: New York, 1967, pg.173
36. ibid.
37. Hitler, Adolf, Mein Kampf, Translated by Ralph Manheim, Houghton Mifflin Company: Boston, 1971, pg. xviii.
38. Taken from a transcript of the Symposium entitled Hitler's Willing Executioners sponsored by the United States Holocaust Research Institute at the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum on April 8, 1996.
No comments:
Post a Comment