had to elect new committees by 2 May, arranged huge drinking sessions and lavish banquets in order to use up the funds which, they were convinced, would soon fall into the hands of the Nazis. 172
This process of ‘co-ordination’ took place in the spring and summer of 1933 at every level, in every city, town and village throughout Germany. What social life remained was at the local inn, or took place in the privacy of people’s homes. Individuals had become isolated except when they gathered in one Nazi organization or another. Society had been reduced to an anonymous and undifferentiated mass and then reconstituted in a new form in which everything was done in the name of Nazism. Open dissent and resistance had become impossible; even discussing or planning it was no longer practicable except in secret. Of course, in practice, such a situation remained an aim rather than a reality. The process of co-ordination was less than perfectly carried out, and a formal adherence to the new order through, for example, attaching the name ‘National Socialist’ to a club, a society or a professional organization, by no means implied a genuine ideological commitment on the part of those involved. Nevertheless, the scale and scope of the co-ordination of German society were breathtaking. And their purpose was not simply to eliminate any space in which opposition could develop. By bringing Germany into line, the new regime wanted to make it amenable to indoctrination and re-education according to the principles of National Socialism.
Reflecting on this process a few years later, the lawyer Raimund Pretzel asked himself what had happened to the 56 per cent of Germans who had voted against the Nazis in the elections of 5 March 1933. How was it, he wondered, that this majority had caved in so rapidly? Why had virtually every social, political and economic institution in Germany fallen into the hands of the Nazis with such apparent ease? ‘The simplest, and, if you looked deeper, nearly always the most basic reason’, he concluded, ‘was fear. Join the thugs to avoid being beaten up. Less clear was a kind of exhilaration, the intoxication of unity, the magnetism of the masses.’ Many, he also thought, had felt betrayed by the weakness of their political leaders, from Braun and Severing to Hugenberg and Hindenburg, and they joined the Nazis in a perverse act of revenge. Some were impressed by the fact that everything the Nazis had predicted seemed to be coming true. ‘There was also (particularly among intellectuals) the belief that they could change the face of the Nazi Party by becoming a member, even now shift its direction. Then of course many jumped on the bandwagon, wanted to be part of a perceived success.’ In the circumstances of the Depression, when times were hard and jobs were scarce, people clung to the mechanical routine of daily life as the only form of security: not to have gone along with the Nazis would have meant risking one’s livelihood and prospects, to have resisted could mean risking one’s life. 173
6
HITLER’S CULTURAL REVOLUTION
DISCORDANT NOTES
THE PURGE OF THE ARTS
‘AGAINST THE UN-GERMAN SPIRIT’
A ‘REVOLUTION OF DESTRUCTION’?
Notes
Bibliography
Abel, Theodore, Why Hitler Came to Power (Cambridge, Mass, 1986 [1938]).
Abrams, Lynn, Workers’ Culture in Imperial Germany: Leisure and Recreation in the Rhineland and Westphalia (London, 1992.).
Ackermann, Josef, Himmler als Ideologe (Göttingen, 1970).
—, ‘Heinrich Himmler: Reichsfuhrer-SS’, in Smelser and Zitelmann (eds.), The Nazi Elite, 98-112.
Adam, Peter, Arts of the Third Reich (London, 1992.).
Adam, Uwe Dietrich, Hochschule und Nationalsozialismus: Die Universität Tübingen im Dritten Reich (Tübingen, 1977).
Adolph, Hans J. L., Otto Wels und die Politik der deutschen Sozialdemokratie 1934-1939: Eine politische Biographie (Berlin, 1971).
Afflerbach, Holger, Falkenhayn: Politisches Denken und Handeln im Kaiserreich
This process of ‘co-ordination’ took place in the spring and summer of 1933 at every level, in every city, town and village throughout Germany. What social life remained was at the local inn, or took place in the privacy of people’s homes. Individuals had become isolated except when they gathered in one Nazi organization or another. Society had been reduced to an anonymous and undifferentiated mass and then reconstituted in a new form in which everything was done in the name of Nazism. Open dissent and resistance had become impossible; even discussing or planning it was no longer practicable except in secret. Of course, in practice, such a situation remained an aim rather than a reality. The process of co-ordination was less than perfectly carried out, and a formal adherence to the new order through, for example, attaching the name ‘National Socialist’ to a club, a society or a professional organization, by no means implied a genuine ideological commitment on the part of those involved. Nevertheless, the scale and scope of the co-ordination of German society were breathtaking. And their purpose was not simply to eliminate any space in which opposition could develop. By bringing Germany into line, the new regime wanted to make it amenable to indoctrination and re-education according to the principles of National Socialism.
Reflecting on this process a few years later, the lawyer Raimund Pretzel asked himself what had happened to the 56 per cent of Germans who had voted against the Nazis in the elections of 5 March 1933. How was it, he wondered, that this majority had caved in so rapidly? Why had virtually every social, political and economic institution in Germany fallen into the hands of the Nazis with such apparent ease? ‘The simplest, and, if you looked deeper, nearly always the most basic reason’, he concluded, ‘was fear. Join the thugs to avoid being beaten up. Less clear was a kind of exhilaration, the intoxication of unity, the magnetism of the masses.’ Many, he also thought, had felt betrayed by the weakness of their political leaders, from Braun and Severing to Hugenberg and Hindenburg, and they joined the Nazis in a perverse act of revenge. Some were impressed by the fact that everything the Nazis had predicted seemed to be coming true. ‘There was also (particularly among intellectuals) the belief that they could change the face of the Nazi Party by becoming a member, even now shift its direction. Then of course many jumped on the bandwagon, wanted to be part of a perceived success.’ In the circumstances of the Depression, when times were hard and jobs were scarce, people clung to the mechanical routine of daily life as the only form of security: not to have gone along with the Nazis would have meant risking one’s livelihood and prospects, to have resisted could mean risking one’s life. 173
6
HITLER’S CULTURAL REVOLUTION
DISCORDANT NOTES
THE PURGE OF THE ARTS
‘AGAINST THE UN-GERMAN SPIRIT’
A ‘REVOLUTION OF DESTRUCTION’?
Notes
Bibliography
Abel, Theodore, Why Hitler Came to Power (Cambridge, Mass, 1986 [1938]).
Abrams, Lynn, Workers’ Culture in Imperial Germany: Leisure and Recreation in the Rhineland and Westphalia (London, 1992.).
Ackermann, Josef, Himmler als Ideologe (Göttingen, 1970).
—, ‘Heinrich Himmler: Reichsfuhrer-SS’, in Smelser and Zitelmann (eds.), The Nazi Elite, 98-112.
Adam, Peter, Arts of the Third Reich (London, 1992.).
Adam, Uwe Dietrich, Hochschule und Nationalsozialismus: Die Universität Tübingen im Dritten Reich (Tübingen, 1977).
Adolph, Hans J. L., Otto Wels und die Politik der deutschen Sozialdemokratie 1934-1939: Eine politische Biographie (Berlin, 1971).
Afflerbach, Holger, Falkenhayn: Politisches Denken und Handeln im Kaiserreich
Similar Books
Embrace the Fire
Tamara Shoemaker
Broken Promises
J.K. Coi
Scrapbook of Secrets
Mollie Cox Bryan
Shatter
Michael Robotham
Further Than Passion
Cheryl Holt
Fallen Rogue
Amy Rench
The Rise of Rome: The Making of the World's Greatest Empire
Anthony Everitt
Dylan's Redemption
Jennifer Ryan
Daughters of the Nile
Stephanie Dray
At Home with Mr Darcy
Victoria Connelly