DOCSLIB.ORG

Steven R. Welch Lecturer in Modern German History, the University of Melbourne

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Steven R. Welch Lecturer in Modern German History, the University of Melbourne The Case of Anton Mayer A Half-Jewish Deserter from the Wehrmacht by Steven R. Welch Lecturer in Modern German History, the University of Melbourne n 23 July, 1944, the sailor Reich, Anton Mayer was a Mischling, Dr. Bernhard Losener, one of the Anton Mayer, who had been first degree - a "half-Jew." 2 He thus notorious "experts" on Jewish affairs in 0 sentenced to death for belonged to those 100,000 or more the Interior Ministry, estimated in late desertion by a naval court three days individuals who found themselves 1935 that there were then some 45,000 earlier, penned a four-page letter to uncomfortably stranded in a racial no- half-Jewish men of military age in Admiral Donitz, Commander of the man's land carved out by the Nazis to Germany.5 The existence of this German Navy. Mayer pleaded to be separate Aryans on one side from relatively substantial pool of potential given the chance to redeem himself by Volljuden (full-Jews) on the other. soldiers may well have been one of the being dispatched immediately to the factors motivating the Nazi leadership to front. His letter (see illustration 1) create a special category for half-Jews, concluded with the following passage: thus preserving them for future use as soldiers for the Fiihrer. I beg you to believe me when I say that I Mischlinge and the was always a good German; in earlier years I German Military In its eagerness to demonstrate its always suffered under the persecution which loyalty to the principles of the new Nazi afflicted us as Germans in Romania. I was Before we examine in more detail the order, the German military had already proud of my Germanness and in my work as a dismissed its "full-blooded" Jewish language teacher I transmitted German culture tragic case of Anton Mayer, first it is officers and soldiers in the course of and German values! I ask you, Herr Admiral, necessary to survey the bizarre to consider the fact that I am the only son of topography of that no-man's land 1934, well before the promulgation of my elderly parents who sacrificed everything inhabited by the Mischlinge and to the Nuremberg Laws. The initial purging for my studies. I am their sole support in their chronicle their treatment by the German of Jews from the 100,000 man army old age and my disgraceful end would also military. The category of Mischling was involved a relatively small number of mean their death! I beg you, Herr Admiral, to invented in late 1935, in the process of Jewish soldiers and officers, perhaps no allow me the chance to prove myself under the refining the stipulations of the infamous more than 70.6 In spring 1935, when most difficult circumstances! Long live our Nuremberg Laws issued in September of Hitler reinstituted compulsory military great Fiihrer! Long live Greater Germany! 1 that same year. The First Regulation to service - a blatant violation of the As was the case for thousands of the Reich Citizenship Law of 14 provisions of the Versailles Treaty - a other German soldiers sentenced to death November 1935, singled out for new conscription law came into effect. for desertion during World War II, discrimination a new group consisting of Paragraph 15 of that law stipulated that Mayer's request fell on deaf ears. On 21 individuals of "mixed Jewish blood."3 In "Aryan descent is a precondition for August, 1944 he was beheaded by general terms, Mischlinge of the first active military service". 7 A subsequent guillotine in the prison of Brandenburg- degree were persons who descended ordinance issued in late May 1935 Havel west of Berlin. This method of from two Jewish grandparents, while defined as "non-Aryan" anyone who had execution - as opposed to the normal Mischlinge of the second degree had just one Jewish parent or grandparent. At the method of death by firing squad - was one Jewish grandparent. According to a same time, the ordinance also stated that considered particularly dishonourable census taken in 1939 there were 64,000 non-Aryans could petition for acceptance and "unsoldierly" and was reserved for Mischlinge of the first degree (half- into the military, thus leaving open the cases deemed especially heinous by the Jews) and 43,000 Mischlinge of the possibility that exceptions to the harsh military leadership. In Anton Mayer's second degree (quarter-Jews) in exclusionary policy might be approved. 8 case it was apparently his racial origins Germany, including the recently annexed After the Nuremberg Laws were which disqualified him from being territories of Austria and the issued in late 1935, it became necessary executed by firing squad. In the Sudetenland.4 It is unclear how many of for the military to revise its own grotesque racist terminology of the Third the half-Jews were males of military age. definitions of non-Aryans in order to bring them in line with the legal norms cases". Soldiers or their commanders remain in the military as a way of the regime had established. As a result, could submit petitions to the Armed protecting themselves and their Jewish the revamped conscription law of June Forces Command requesting that family members. By performing bravely 1936 distinguished between Jews and individual half-Jews be permitted to on the battlefield they believed they Mischlinge. The former were remain soldiers (see illustration 2). could prove their loyalty and utility to the categorically excluded from military Hitler's secret order appears to have Nazi regime and thus pave the way for service: "A Jew cannot carry out active had little immediate impact. Some units recognition and acceptance in German military service". 9 All Mischlinge, by apparently did not hear about the order, society once the war was over. Although contrast, were required to serve in the in others commanders simply ignored it. these hopes ultimately proved German military. Mischlinge of the first In those units where it did become unfounded, they were temporarily degree, or half-Jews, were, however, known it triggered a surge of petitions as nourished by actions taken by Hitler and prohibited from being promoted to the an army communication of August, 1940 the military leadership in the course of status of non-commissioned officer. Such indicated. 12 Some of these petitions did, 1941. advancement would put them in a in fact, receive Hitler's approval and position of command over Aryans, In July 1941, just weeks after such soldiers were issued a document obviously an unacceptable situation from Operation Barbarossa had been launched which authorised them to remain in the against the Soviet Union, Hitler endorsed the racist point of view endorsed by the Wehrmacht (see illustration 3). A month German military. Quarter-Jews enjoyed a a policy which allowed half-Jews who later Army High Command (OKH) had already served in Wehrmacht and slightly greater degree of equality with complained that "again and again cases their Aryan comrades and could in had been dismissed as a result of his have come to the attention of the OKH in order of April 1940, to apply to be exceptional cases become non- which Jewish Mischlinge of the first commissioned officers. recalled to military service if they had degree (50%) or soldiers married to such won a war decoration (the Iron Cross or a Jewish Mischlinge are still in active Helmut Kruger, a half-Jew born in campaign citation). 16 Every single case military service in violation of the 1913, commented in his memoirs that had to be referred to Armed Forces order...of 20.4.40". 13 The OKH insisted Mischlinge greeted the 1936 law with Command for the Rihrer's personal that all active servicemen had to sign a relief: "Many Mischlinge of military age approval. between 18 and 25 joyfully volunteered declaration attesting to their racial status for the Labor Service or the military in (see illustration 4). What prompted such a policy change on Hitler's part? The introductory the belief that after fulfilling their 'duty It seems quite likely that from comments at the meeting at which the of honour to the German people' they autumn 1940 on many half-Jews signed proposals were discussed provide some might anticipate some additional false Aryan declarations in order to avoid mitigation [of pressure] in their being expelled from the military. Others, clues. The chair of the meeting noted professional lives and above all more unaware of their status as Jewish "that the Fiihrer has indicated that he protection for their Jewish parent". 1° Mischlinge, also signed declarations wishes to show that he is not ungrateful These hopes for better treatment in return affirming that they were of German toward Mischlinge who have fought and for service to the Nazi fatherland were, blood and stayed with their army units. bled for the Third Reich and wishes to however, sadly misplaced as the events Their true status would only come to avoid [a situation] in which after the war of the coming years were to demonstrate. light when they later sought permission front fighters (possibly with war decorations) express publicly at home During the first six months of the war to marry - and were thus required to and abroad their anger and discontent. It Jewish Mischlinge fought alongside their submit documented proof of their Aryan is also intended that 25% Mischlinge, Aryan comrades in the Blitzkrieg against descent - or for some other reason came who exhibit certain characteristics, may Poland as well as in the Sitzkrieg in the to the attention of the Nazi bureaucracy be treated after the war as Germans West.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Militärgerichtsbarkeit in Österreich (Circa 1850–1945)
    BRGÖ 2016 Beiträge zur Rechtsgeschichte Österreichs Martin MOLL, Graz Militärgerichtsbarkeit in Österreich (circa 1850–1945) Military jurisdiction in Austria, ca. 1850–1945 This article starts around 1850, a period which saw a new codification of civil and military penal law with a more precise separation of these areas. Crimes committed by soldiers were now defined parallel to civilian ones. However, soldiers were still tried before military courts. The military penal code comprised genuine military crimes like deser- tion and mutiny. Up to 1912 the procedure law had been archaic as it did not distinguish between the state prosecu- tor and the judge. But in 1912 the legislature passed a modern military procedure law which came into practice only weeks before the outbreak of World War I, during which millions of trials took place, conducted against civilians as well as soldiers. This article outlines the structure of military courts in Austria-Hungary, ranging from courts responsible for a single garrison up to the Highest Military Court in Vienna. When Austria became a republic in November 1918, military jurisdiction was abolished. The authoritarian government of Chancellor Engelbert Dollfuß reintroduced martial law in late 1933; it was mainly used against Social Democrats who staged the February 1934 uprising. After the National Socialist ‘July putsch’ of 1934 a military court punished the rioters. Following Aus- tria’s annexation to Germany in 1938, German military law was introduced in Austria. After the war’s end in 1945, these Nazi remnants were abolished, leaving Austria without any military jurisdiction. Keywords: Austria – Austria as part of Hitler’s Germany –First Republic – Habsburg Monarchy – Military Jurisdiction Einleitung und Themenübersicht allen Staaten gab es eine eigene, von der zivilen Justiz getrennte Strafgerichtsbarkeit des Militärs.
    [Show full text]
  • The Rise and Fall of an Internationally Codified Denial of the Defense of Superior Orders
    xv The Rise and Fall of an Internationally Codified Denial of the Defense of Superior Orders 30 Revue De Droit Militaire Et De Droit De LA Guerre 183 (1991) Introduction s long as there have been trials for violations of the laws and customs of A war, more popularly known as "war crimes trials", the trial tribunals have been confronted with the defense of "superior orders"-the claim that the accused did what he did because he was ordered to do so by a superior officer (or by his Government) and that his refusal to obey the order would have brought dire consequences upon him. And as along as there have been trials for violations of the laws and customs ofwar the trial tribunals have almost uniformly rejected that defense. However, since the termination of the major programs of war crimes trials conducted after World War II there has been an ongoing dispute as to whether a plea of superior orders should be allowed, or disallowed, and, if allowed, the criteria to be used as the basis for its application. Does international action in this area constitute an invasion of the national jurisdiction? Should the doctrine apply to all war crimes or only to certain specifically named crimes? Should the illegality of the order received be such that any "reasonable" person would recognize its invalidity; or should it be such as to be recognized by a person of"ordinary sense and understanding"; or by a person ofthe "commonest understanding"? Should it be "illegal on its face"; or "manifesdy illegal"; or "palpably illegal"; or of "obvious criminality,,?1 An inability to reach a generally acceptable consensus on these problems has resulted in the repeated rejection of attempts to legislate internationally in this area.
    [Show full text]
  • The Role of Antisemitism in the Expulsion of Non-Aryan Students, 1933-1945 Béla Bodo
    The Role of Antisemitism in the Expulsion of non-Aryan Students, 1933-1945 Béla Bodo “The goal is achieved! No more Jews at German Universities,” read the headline of the main Nazi student paper, Die Bewegung, in late 1938. The author hailed the students as the vanguard of Nazism at the institutions of higher learning. The student journalist argued that students, rather than professors and academic administrators, had pioneered antisemitism at German universities before 1933. By putting pressure on the authorities to expedite the expulsion of Jews, the journalist concluded, students made an important contribution to the creation of the Nazi university in the Third Reich.1 This contemporary assessment of the role of students and professors stands in sharp contrast to the conclusions of modern historians. The two most important articles written on the expulsion process concentrate almost exclusively on the operation of the Nazi bureaucratic machine and on the fights between various party and state organizations, each trying to aggrandize itself by realizing its own agenda. They do not discuss, however, what happened to Jewish students at the local level during the months after the Nazi takeover in January 1933. Neither do they examine the roles and motives of Gentile students and professors in the expulsion process.2 Beside these articles, there are also a number of local studies that deal in passing with the fate of Jewish students. However, they tend to limit themselves to the description of events, to the listing of administrative measures, and to providing statistical data on the decline of the Jewish student population.3 As far as motivation is concerned, the books on the 1 Die Bewegung, 47 (1938), Bundesarchiv (BA) Koblenz, ZSg 129/152.
    [Show full text]
  • Abbreviations Used in Notes and Bibliography
    Abbreviations Used in Notes and Bibliography AUA-M Air University Archive, Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama ANL Archives Nationales Luxembourg BaB Bundesarchiv Berlin BaMF Bundesarchiv Militärarchiv Freiburg BaZnsA Bundesarchiv Zentralnachweisestelle Aachen GHM German History Museum Berlin HsaD Hauptstaatsarchiv Düsseldorf HasH Hauptstaatsarchiv Hannover HSaM Hessisches Staatsarchiv Marburg HStAWi Hauptstaatsarchiv Wiesbaden HIADL Hoover Institute Archives, Stanford Library, Daniel Lerner Collection IWML Imperial War Museum London IfZM Institut für Zeitgeschichte München IMTN International Military Tribunal Nuremberg LaSaar Landesarchiv Saarland LaSpey Landesarchiv Speyer LWVH Landeswohlfahrtsverband Hessen MHAP Military Historical Archive, Prague NAA National Archives of Australia NAL National Archives Kew Gardens, London NAW National Archives Washington D.C. OKaW Österreichisches Kriegsarchiv Wein ÖStA Österreichisches Staatsarchiv Vienna PMGO Provost Marshall General’s Office (U.S.A) SaL Staatsarchiv Ludwigsburg SaW Staatsarchiv Würzburg SAB State Archive Bydgoszcz, Poland TBJG Elke Frölich, Die Tagbücher von Joseph Goebbels: Im Auftrag des Institute für Zeitsgeschichte und mit Unterstützung des Staatlichen Archivdienstes Rußlands. Teil II Dikate 1941–1945 (Münich 1995–1996). WLC Weiner Library Collection 191 Notes Introduction: Sippenhaft, Terror and Fear: The Historiography of the Nazi Terror State 1 . Christopher Hutton, Race and the Third Reich: Linguistics, Racial Anthropology and Genetics in the Third Reich (Cambridge 2005), p. 18. 2 . Rosemary O’Kane, Terror, Force and States: The Path from Modernity (Cheltham 1996), p. 19. O’Kane defines a system of terror, as one that is ‘distinguished by summary justice, where the innocence or guilt of the victims is immaterial’. 3 . See Robert Thurston, ‘The Family during the Great Terror 1935–1941’, Soviet Studies , 43, 3 (1991), pp. 553–74.
    [Show full text]
  • Bd 4 Eva Ungar.Pdf
    Hamburg Wien Budapest Kangra Jubar Neu-Delhi Bangkok PHOTO: PRIVATE COLLECTION UNGÁR FAMILY PHOTO: PRIVATE Eva Ungár wurde als Eva Scherer am 15. Dezember 1913 in Wien in eine sozialdemokratische Familie geboren. Ihr Großvater Paul Hönigsberg war Arzt, die Großmut- ter Emma Sozialdemokratin und Frauenrechtlerin. Ihre Mutter Clara zählte zu den ersten Medizinstudentinnen der Universität Wien, ihr Vater Eduard war Maschinen- bauingenieur. Eva studierte ebenfalls Medizin und lern- te beim Studium in Wien ihren zukünftigen Ehemann Imre Ungár, der aus Budapest stammte, kennen. Nach dem „Anschluss” 1938 musste Imre Ungár aufgrund sei- Eva Scherer and Imre Ungár ner jüdischer Abstammung Wien verlassen. Eva, selbst shortly before their departure so genannter Mischling 1. Grades und Sozialdemokratin, from Vienna in 1938 begleitete ihn, und die beiden konnten mithilfe des in- dischen Kommilitonen Santosh Kumar Sen nach Indien emigrieren. 1949 kehrten Eva und Imre mit ihren Kin- dern in Imre’s Heimatstadt Budapest zurück, wo sie an der Chirurgischen Abteilung des Nationalen Tuberkulo- se-Institutes Korányi tätig waren. Zwei ihrer vier Kinder wurden ebenfalls ÄrztInnen. Ten years in India Eva Ungár geboren 1913 / born 1913 Eva Ungár, née Scherer, was born in Vienna into a family of Social Democrats on 15 December 1913. Her grandfather Paul Hönigsberg was a doctor, her grand- mother Emma a Social Democrat and feminist. Her mother Clara was one of the first women to study Medicine at the University of Vienna, her father Eduard was a mechanical engineer. Eva also studied Medicine and met her future hus- band Imre Ungár from Budapest during her studies in Vienna. Following the “Anschluss” in 1938, Imre had to leave Vienna as a result of his Jewish origins.
    [Show full text]
  • Roma and Sinti Under-Studied Victims of Nazism
    UNITED STATES HOLOCAUST MEMORIAL MUSEUM CENTER FOR ADVANCED HOLOCAUST STUDIES Roma and Sinti Under-Studied Victims of Nazism Symposium Proceedings W A S H I N G T O N , D. C. Roma and Sinti Under-Studied Victims of Nazism Symposium Proceedings CENTER FOR ADVANCED HOLOCAUST STUDIES UNITED STATES HOLOCAUST MEMORIAL MUSEUM 2002 The assertions, opinions, and conclusions in this occasional paper are those of the authors. They do not necessarily reflect those of the United States Holocaust Memorial Council or of the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. Third printing, July 2004 Copyright © 2002 by Ian Hancock, assigned to the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum; Copyright © 2002 by Michael Zimmermann, assigned to the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum; Copyright © 2002 by Guenter Lewy, assigned to the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum; Copyright © 2002 by Mark Biondich, assigned to the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum; Copyright © 2002 by Denis Peschanski, assigned to the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum; Copyright © 2002 by Viorel Achim, assigned to the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum; Copyright © 2002 by David M. Crowe, assigned to the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum Contents Foreword .....................................................................................................................................i Paul A. Shapiro and Robert M. Ehrenreich Romani Americans (“Gypsies”).......................................................................................................1 Ian
    [Show full text]
  • Dubious Means to Final Solutions: Extracting Light from the Darkness of Ein Führer and Brother Number One
    Florida State University Law Review Volume 31 Issue 1 Article 5 2003 Dubious Means to Final Solutions: Extracting Light From the Darkness of Ein Führer and Brother Number One Román Ortega-Cowan [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.law.fsu.edu/lr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Román Ortega-Cowan, Dubious Means to Final Solutions: Extracting Light From the Darkness of Ein Führer and Brother Number One, 31 Fla. St. U. L. Rev. (2003) . https://ir.law.fsu.edu/lr/vol31/iss1/5 This Comment is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Florida State University Law Review by an authorized editor of Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW DUBIOUS MEANS TO FINAL SOLUTIONS: EXTRACTING LIGHT FROM THE DARKNESS OF EIN FÜHRER AND BROTHER NUMBER ONE Román Ortega-Cowan VOLUME 31 FALL 2003 NUMBER 1 Recommended citation: Román Ortega-Cowan, Dubious Means to Final Solutions: Extracting Light From the Darkness of Ein Führer and Brother Number One, 31 FLA. ST. U. L. REV. 163 (2003). DUBIOUS MEANS TO FINAL SOLUTIONS: EXTRACTING LIGHT FROM THE DARKNESS OF EIN FÜHRER AND BROTHER NUMBER ONE ROMÁN ORTEGA-COWAN* I. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 164 II. TUNING THE PIANO ........................................................................................... 165 A. The Players: The German Nazis and Cambodian Khmer Rouge .............. 165 B. A Single Word, Eternal Dread: Genocide................................................... 166 1. Lemkin’s Quest..................................................................................... 166 2. Room for One More: Political Groups .................................................. 168 C. Turning Principles into Action: The Legal System ...................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Problems the Mischlinge Presented the Nazis by Walter S
    The Problems the Mischlinge Presented the Nazis By Walter S. Zapotoczny The word Mischling means “half-caste, mongrel or hybrid.” In the 1920s, when French colonial soldiers had affairs with women in German territories they occupied, the children who resulted were called Mischlinge. Hitler believed that the Jews brought these French blacks to Germany to destroy the “White Race.” The term became associated with any mixed race. Two years after seizing power, the Nazis implemented laws to separate Mischlinge from Aryans. In 1935, the Nuremberg Laws created two new “racial” categories: the half-Jew (Jewish Mischlinge first degree), and the quarter-Jew (Jewish Mischlinge second degree). Mischlinge, accordingly to Hitler, were the products of “unholy unions.” Hitler claimed that Mischlinge “are the sad products of the irresistibly spreading contamination of our sexual life; the vices of the parents are revealed in the sickness of the children. Blood sin and desecration of the race are original sin in this world and the end of humanity which surrenders to it.” The 1935 Nuremberg Laws defined the categories of Mischlinge according to the religion of a person’s grandparents. Nazi scientists were unable to differentiate between Jewish and German blood. Left with no reliable “scientific” method for physically identifying Mischlinge, Nazi officials had to turn to church achieves or local court records of evidence of a person’s “race.” Nazis were confused about Mischlinge, since they were both Jewish and German. Most Mischlinge soon discovered that the Nazis took away their rights. The Nazis denied them citizenship in practice and they could not hold positions of authority.
    [Show full text]
  • Law for the Protection of German Blood and German Honor (Also Called the Nuremberg Laws) — September 15, 1935 5
    Lesson 10: Handout 1, Document 1 Laws Passed by Hitler and the Nazis Law for the Protection of German Blood and German Honor (also called the Nuremberg laws) — September 15, 1935 5 Firm in the knoWledge that the puritY of German blood is the basis for the surViVal of the German people and inspired bY the unshakeable determination to safeguard the future of the German nation, the Reichstag has unanimouslY resolVed upon the folloWing laW. Section 1 Marriages between Jews and citizens of German or some related blood are forbidden. Such marriages . are invalid, even if they take place abroad in order to avoid the law. Section 2 Sexual relations outside marriage between Jews and citizens of German or related blood are forbidden. Section 3 Jews will not be permitted to employ female citizens of German or related blood who are under 45 years as housekeepers. Section 4 1. Jews are forbidden to raise the national flag or display the national colors. 2. However, they are allowed to display the Jewish colors. The exercise of this right is protected by the State. Section 5 Anyone who disregards Section 1 . Section 2 . Sections 3 or 4 will be pun - ished with imprisonment up to one year or with a fine, or with one of these penalties. Purpose: To deepen understanding of the power of conformity and discrimination in Nazi Germany and in society today. • 150 Lesson 10: Handout 1, Document 2 Laws Passed by Hitler and the Nazis The Reich Citizenship Law (also called the Nuremberg laws) — September 15, 1935 Article 1 6 Section 2 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Military Ranks
    WHO WILL SERVE? EDUCATION, LABOR MARKETS, AND MILITARY PERSONNEL POLICY by Lindsay P. Cohn Department of Political Science Duke University Date:_______________________ Approved: ___________________________ Peter D. Feaver, Supervisor ___________________________ David Soskice ___________________________ Christopher Gelpi ___________________________ Tim Büthe ___________________________ Alexander B. Downes Dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of Political Science in the Graduate School of Duke University 2007 ABSTRACT WHO WILL SERVE? EDUCATION, LABOR MARKETS, AND MILITARY PERSONNEL POLICY by Lindsay P. Cohn Department of Political Science Duke University Date:_______________________ Approved: ___________________________ Peter D. Feaver, Supervisor ___________________________ David Soskice ___________________________ Christopher Gelpi ___________________________ Tim Büthe ___________________________ Alexander B. Downes An abstract of a dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of Political Science in the Graduate School of Duke University 2007 Copyright by Lindsay P. Cohn 2007 Abstract Contemporary militaries depend on volunteer soldiers capable of dealing with advanced technology and complex missions. An important factor in the successful recruiting, retention, and employment of quality personnel is the set of personnel policies which a military has in place. It might be assumed that military policies on personnel derive solely from the functional necessities of the organization’s mission, given that the stakes of military effectiveness are generally very high. Unless the survival of the state is in jeopardy, however, it will seek to limit defense costs, which may entail cutting into effectiveness. How a state chooses to make the tradeoffs between effectiveness and economy will be subject to influences other than military necessity.
    [Show full text]
  • 4. the Nazis Take Power
    4. The Nazis Take Power Anyone who interprets National Socialism as merely a political movement knows almost nothing about it. It is more than a religion. It is the determination to create the new man. ADOLF HITLER OVERVIEW Within weeks of taking office, Adolf Hitler was altering German life. Within a year, Joseph Goebbels, one of his top aides, could boast: The revolution that we have made is a total revolution. It encompasses every aspect of public life from the bottom up… We have replaced individuality with collective racial consciousness and the individual with the community… We must develop the organizations in which every individual’s entire life will be regulated by the Volk community, as represented by the Party. There is no longer arbitrary will. There are no longer any free realms in which the individual belongs to himself… The time of personal happiness is over.1 How did Hitler do it? How did he destroy the Weimar Republic and replace it with a totalitarian government – one that controls every part of a person’s life? Many people have pointed out that he did not destroy democracy all at once. Instead, he moved gradually, with one seemingly small compromise leading to another and yet another. By the time many were aware of the danger, they were isolated and alone. This chapter details those steps. It also explores why few Germans protested the loss of their freedom and many even applauded the changes the Nazis brought to the nation. Historian Fritz Stern offers one answer. “The great appeal of National Socialism – and perhaps of every totalitarian dictatorship in this century – was the promise of absolute authority.
    [Show full text]
  • AN OVERVIEW of the HOLOCAUST Written and Compiled by Dr
    AN OVERVIEW OF THE HOLOCAUST Written and Compiled by Dr. Nancy E. Rupprecht* Middle Tennessee State University “You hear me speak. But do you hear me feel?” Written by German/Jewish poet Gertrud Kolmar who was murdered in Auschwitz-Birkenau in 1943 When Adolf Hitler's National Socialist Party seized power on January 30, 1933, there were approximately 525,000 people of Jewish faith living in Germany, less than one percent of the population. Hitler quickly destroyed the Weimar Republic and created a totalitarian state based on racial ideology in theory, in law and in practice. The Holocaust or Shoah,1 the genocide directed primarily against the Jews of Europe, developed gradually and inexorably with small discriminatory measures such as university quota limits for Jews and the prohibition of Jewish ownership of German land (both in 1933) and escalated with the Nuremberg Laws of 1935 that defined what it meant to be a Jew,2 deprived Jews of German citizenship and legally prohibited them from a variety of occupations and rights of citizenship. At the same time laws were passed making sexual relations between Germans and those of unacceptable race into a new crime called "Racial Pollution" (Rassenschande) that was punishable by a variety of sanctions up to and including the death penalty for both participants.3 1 Although some scholars prefer the Hebrew word Shoah (catastrophe) to the term Holocaust, this overview will use Holocaust. For many years scholarship on the Holocaust focused on the German perpetrators rather than their victims, primarily because the Germans created most of the written official records.
    [Show full text]