Nazi Germany, 1933-1939
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
D'antonio, Michael Senior Thesis.Pdf
Before the Storm German Big Business and the Rise of the NSDAP by Michael D’Antonio A thesis submitted to the Faculty of the University of Delaware in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Honors Degree in History with Distinction Spring 2016 © 2016 Michael D’Antonio All Rights Reserved Before the Storm German Big Business and the Rise of the NSDAP by Michael D’Antonio Approved: ____________________________________________________________ Dr. James Brophy Professor in charge of thesis on behalf of the Advisory Committee Approved: ____________________________________________________________ Dr. David Shearer Committee member from the Department of History Approved: ____________________________________________________________ Dr. Barbara Settles Committee member from the Board of Senior Thesis Readers Approved: ____________________________________________________________ Michael Arnold, Ph.D. Director, University Honors Program ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This senior thesis would not have been possible without the assistance of Dr. James Brophy of the University of Delaware history department. His guidance in research, focused critique, and continued encouragement were instrumental in the project’s formation and completion. The University of Delaware Office of Undergraduate Research also deserves a special thanks, for its continued support of both this work and the work of countless other students. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................. -
Ordinances—1934
Australian Capital Territory Ordinances—1934 A chronological listing of ordinances notified in 1934 [includes ordinances 1934 Nos 1-26] Ordinances—1934 1 Sheriff Ordinance Repeal Ordinance 1934 (repealed) repealed by Ord1937-27 notified 8 February 1934 (Cwlth Gaz 1934 No 8) sch 3 commenced 8 February 1934 (see Seat of Government 23 December 1937 (Administration) Act 1910 (Cwlth), s 12) 2 * Administration and Probate Ordinance 1934 (repealed) repealed by A2000-80 notified 8 February 1934 (Cwlth Gaz 1934 No 8) sch 4 commenced 8 February 1934 (see Seat of Government 21 December 2000 (Administration) Act 1910 (Cwlth), s 12) 3 Liquor (Renewal of Licences) Ordinance 1934 (repealed) repealed by Ord1937-27 notified 8 February 1934 (Cwlth Gaz 1934 No 9) sch 3 commenced 8 February 1934 (see Seat of Government 23 December 1937 (Administration) Act 1910 (Cwlth), s 12) 4 Oaths Ordinance 1934 (repealed) repealed by Ord1984-79 notified 15 February 1934 (Cwlth Gaz 1934 No 10) s 2 commenced 15 February 1934 (see Seat of Government 19 December 1984 (Administration) Act 1910 (Cwlth), s 12) 5 Dogs Registration Ordinance 1934 (repealed) repealed by Ord1975-18 notified 1 March 1934 (Cwlth Gaz 1934 No 13) sch commenced 1 March 1934 (see Seat of Government (Administration) 21 July 1975 Act 1910 (Cwlth), s 12) 6 * Administration and Probate Ordinance (No 2) 1934 (repealed) repealed by A2000-80 notified 22 March 1934 (Cwlth Gaz 1934 No 17) sch 4 commenced 22 March 1934 (see Seat of Government (Administration) 21 December 2000 Act 1910 (Cwlth), s 12) 7 Advisory -
Records of the Immigration and Naturalization Service, 1891-1957, Record Group 85 New Orleans, Louisiana Crew Lists of Vessels Arriving at New Orleans, LA, 1910-1945
Records of the Immigration and Naturalization Service, 1891-1957, Record Group 85 New Orleans, Louisiana Crew Lists of Vessels Arriving at New Orleans, LA, 1910-1945. T939. 311 rolls. (~A complete list of rolls has been added.) Roll Volumes Dates 1 1-3 January-June, 1910 2 4-5 July-October, 1910 3 6-7 November, 1910-February, 1911 4 8-9 March-June, 1911 5 10-11 July-October, 1911 6 12-13 November, 1911-February, 1912 7 14-15 March-June, 1912 8 16-17 July-October, 1912 9 18-19 November, 1912-February, 1913 10 20-21 March-June, 1913 11 22-23 July-October, 1913 12 24-25 November, 1913-February, 1914 13 26 March-April, 1914 14 27 May-June, 1914 15 28-29 July-October, 1914 16 30-31 November, 1914-February, 1915 17 32 March-April, 1915 18 33 May-June, 1915 19 34-35 July-October, 1915 20 36-37 November, 1915-February, 1916 21 38-39 March-June, 1916 22 40-41 July-October, 1916 23 42-43 November, 1916-February, 1917 24 44 March-April, 1917 25 45 May-June, 1917 26 46 July-August, 1917 27 47 September-October, 1917 28 48 November-December, 1917 29 49-50 Jan. 1-Mar. 15, 1918 30 51-53 Mar. 16-Apr. 30, 1918 31 56-59 June 1-Aug. 15, 1918 32 60-64 Aug. 16-0ct. 31, 1918 33 65-69 Nov. 1', 1918-Jan. 15, 1919 34 70-73 Jan. 16-Mar. 31, 1919 35 74-77 April-May, 1919 36 78-79 June-July, 1919 37 80-81 August-September, 1919 38 82-83 October-November, 1919 39 84-85 December, 1919-January, 1920 40 86-87 February-March, 1920 41 88-89 April-May, 1920 42 90 June, 1920 43 91 July, 1920 44 92 August, 1920 45 93 September, 1920 46 94 October, 1920 47 95-96 November, 1920 48 97-98 December, 1920 49 99-100 Jan. -
Discrimination and Law in Nazi Germany
Cohen Center for Holocaust and Genocide Studies Name:_______________________________ at Keene State College __________________________________________________________________________________________________ “To Remember…and to Teach.” www.keene.edu/cchgs Student Outline: Destroying Democracy From Within (1933-1938) 1. In the November 1932 elections the Nazis received _______ (%) of the vote. 2. Hitler was named Chancellor of a right-wing coalition government on _________________ _____, __________. 3. Hitler’s greatest fear is that he could be dismissed by President ____________________________. 4. Hitler’s greatest unifier of the many conservatives was fear of the _____________. 5. The Reichstag Fire Decree of February 1933 allowed Hitler to use article _______ to suspend the Reichstag and suspend ________________ ____________ for all Germans. 6. In March 5, 1933 election, the Nazi Party had _________ % of the vote. 7. Concentration camps (KL) emerged from below as camps for “__________________ ________________” prisoners. 8. On March 24, 1933, the _______________ Act gave Hitler power to rule as dictator during the declared “state of emergency.” It was the __________________ Center Party that swayed the vote in Hitler’s favor. 9. Franz Schlegelberger became the State Secretary in the German Ministry of ___________________. He believed that the courts role was to maintain ________________ __________________. He based his rulings on the principle of the ____________________ ___________________ order. He endorsed the Enabling Act because the government, in his view, could act with _______________, ________________, and _____________________. 10. One week after the failed April 1, 1933 Boycott, the Nazis passed the “Law for the Restoration of the Professional _________________ ______________________. The April 11 supplement attempted to legally define “non-Aryan” as someone with a non-Aryan ____________________ or ________________________. -
From the Nuremberg Trials to the Memorial Nuremberg Trials
Presse- und Öffentlichkeitsarbeit Memorium Nürnberger Prozesse Hirschelgasse 9-11 90403 Nürnberg Telefon: 0911 / 2 31-66 89 Telefon: 0911 / 2 31-54 20 Telefax: 0911 / 2 31-1 42 10 E-Mail: [email protected] www.museen.nuernberg.de – Press Release From the Nuremberg Trials to the Memorial Nuremberg Trials Nuremberg’s name is linked with the NSDAP Party Rallies held here between 1933 and 1938 and – Presseinformation with the „Racial Laws“ adopted in 1935. It is also linked with the trials where leading representatives of the Nazi regime had to answer for their crimes in an international court of justice. Between 20 November, 1945, and 1 October, 1946, the International Military Tribunal’s trial of the main war criminals (IMT) was held in Court Room 600 at the Nuremberg Palace of Justice. Between 1946 and 1949, twelve follow-up trials were also held here. Those tried included high- ranking representatives of the military, administration, medical profession, legal system, industry Press Release and politics. History Two years after Germany had unleashed World War II on 1 September, 1939, leading politicians and military staff of the anti-Hitler coalition started to consider bringing to account those Germans responsible for war crimes which had come to light at that point. The Moscow Declaration of 1943 and the Conference of Yalta of February 1945 confirmed this attitude. Nevertheless, the ideas – Presseinformation concerning the type of proceeding to use in the trial were extremely divergent. After difficult negotiations, on 8 August, 1945, the four Allied powers (USA, Britain, France and the Soviet Union) concluded the London Agreement, on a "Charter for The International Military Tribunal", providing for indictment for the following crimes in a trial based on the rule of law: 1. -
Nazi Privatization in 1930S Germany1 by GERMÀ BEL
Economic History Review (2009) Against the mainstream: Nazi privatization in 1930s Germany1 By GERMÀ BEL Nationalization was particularly important in the early 1930s in Germany.The state took over a large industrial concern, large commercial banks, and other minor firms. In the mid-1930s, the Nazi regime transferred public ownership to the private sector. In doing so, they went against the mainstream trends in western capitalistic countries, none of which systematically reprivatized firms during the 1930s. Privatization was used as a political tool to enhance support for the government and for the Nazi Party. In addition, growing financial restrictions because of the cost of the rearmament programme provided additional motivations for privatization. rivatization of large parts of the public sector was one of the defining policies Pof the last quarter of the twentieth century. Most scholars have understood privatization as the transfer of government-owned firms and assets to the private sector,2 as well as the delegation to the private sector of the delivery of services previously delivered by the public sector.3 Other scholars have adopted a much broader meaning of privatization, including (besides transfer of public assets and delegation of public services) deregulation, as well as the private funding of services previously delivered without charging the users.4 In any case, modern privatization has been usually accompanied by the removal of state direction and a reliance on the free market. Thus, privatization and market liberalization have usually gone together. Privatizations in Chile and the UK, which began to be implemented in the 1970s and 1980s, are usually considered the first privatization policies in modern history.5 A few researchers have found earlier instances. -
Presentation Slides
Monetary Policy Alternatives at the Zero Bound: Lessons from the 1930s U.S. Christopher Hanes March 2013 Last resorts for monetary authorities in a liquidity trap: 1) Replace inflation target with target for price level or nominal GDP In standard NK models, credible announcement immediately boosts ∆p, lowers real interest rates while we are still trapped at zero bound. “Expected inflation channel” 2) “Quantitative easing” or Large-Scale Asset Purchases (LSAPs) Buy long-term bonds in exchange for bills or reserves to push down on term, risk or liquidity premiums through “portfolio effects” Can 1) work? Do portfolio effects exist? I look at 1930s, when U.S. in liquidity trap. 1) No clear evidence for expected-inflation channel 2) Yes: evidence of portfolio effects Expected-inflation channel: theory Lessons from the 1930s U.S. β New-Keynesian Phillips curve: ∆p ' E ∆p % (y&y n) t t t%1 γ t T β a distant horizon T ∆p ' E [∆p % (y&y n) ] t t t%T λ j t%τ τ'0 n To hit price-level or $AD target, authorities must boost future (y&y )t%τ For any given path of y in near future, while we are still in liquidity trap, that raises current ∆pt , reduces rt , raises yt , lifts us out of trap Why it might fail: - expectations not so forward-looking, rational - promise not credible Svensson’s “Foolproof Way” out of liquidity trap: peg to depreciated exchange rate “a conspicuous commitment to a higher price level in the future” Expected-inflation channel: 1930s experience Lessons from the 1930s U.S. -
Hitler's American Model
Hitler’s American Model The United States and the Making of Nazi Race Law James Q. Whitman Princeton University Press Princeton and Oxford 1 Introduction This jurisprudence would suit us perfectly, with a single exception. Over there they have in mind, practically speaking, only coloreds and half-coloreds, which includes mestizos and mulattoes; but the Jews, who are also of interest to us, are not reckoned among the coloreds. —Roland Freisler, June 5, 1934 On June 5, 1934, about a year and a half after Adolf Hitler became Chancellor of the Reich, the leading lawyers of Nazi Germany gathered at a meeting to plan what would become the Nuremberg Laws, the notorious anti-Jewish legislation of the Nazi race regime. The meeting was chaired by Franz Gürtner, the Reich Minister of Justice, and attended by officials who in the coming years would play central roles in the persecution of Germany’s Jews. Among those present was Bernhard Lösener, one of the principal draftsmen of the Nuremberg Laws; and the terrifying Roland Freisler, later President of the Nazi People’s Court and a man whose name has endured as a byword for twentieth-century judicial savagery. The meeting was an important one, and a stenographer was present to record a verbatim transcript, to be preserved by the ever-diligent Nazi bureaucracy as a record of a crucial moment in the creation of the new race regime. That transcript reveals the startling fact that is my point of departure in this study: the meeting involved detailed and lengthy discussions of the law of the United States. -
Indictment Presented to the International Military Tribunal (Nuremberg, 18 October 1945)
Indictment presented to the International Military Tribunal (Nuremberg, 18 October 1945) Caption: On 18 October 1945, the International Military Tribunal in Nuremberg accuses 24 German political, military and economic leaders of conspiracy, crimes against peace, war crimes and crimes against humanity. Source: Indictment presented to the International Military Tribunal sitting at Berlin on 18th October 1945. London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office, November 1945. 50 p. (Cmd. 6696). p. 2-50. Copyright: Crown copyright is reproduced with the permission of the Controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office and the Queen's Printer for Scotland URL: http://www.cvce.eu/obj/indictment_presented_to_the_international_military_tribunal_nuremberg_18_october_1945-en- 6b56300d-27a5-4550-8b07-f71e303ba2b1.html Last updated: 03/07/2015 1 / 46 03/07/2015 Indictment presented to the International Military Tribunal (Nuremberg, 18 October 1945) INTERNATIONAL MILITARY TRIBUNAL THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, THE FRENCH REPUBLIC, THE UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN IRELAND, AND THE UNION OF SOVIET SOCIALIST REPUBLICS — AGAINST — HERMANN WILHELM GÖRING, RUDOLF HESS, JOACHIM VON RIBBENTROP, ROBERT LEY, WILHELM KEITEL, ERNST KALTEN BRUNNER, ALFRED ROSENBERG, HANS FRANK, WILHELM FRICK, JULIUS STREICHER, WALTER FUNK, HJALMAR SCHACHT, GUSTAV KRUPP VON BOHLEN UND HALBACH, KARL DÖNITZ, ERICH RAEDER, BALDUR VON SCHIRACH, FRITZ SAUCKEL, ALFRED JODL, MARTIN BORMANN, FRANZ VON PAPEN, ARTUR SEYSS INQUART, ALBERT SPEER, CONSTANTIN VON NEURATH, AND HANS FRITZSCHE, -
Revision Booklet – Germany
GERMANY IN TRANSITION, 1919-1939 There are seven key issues to learn: 1. What challenges were faced by the Weimar Republic from 1919-1923? 2. Why were the Stresemann years considered a ‘golden age’? 3. How and why did the Weimar Republic collapse between 1929 and 1933? 4. How did the Nazis consolidate their power between 1933 and 1934? 5. How did Nazi economic, social and racial policy affect life in Germany? 6. What methods did the Nazis use to control Germany? 7. What factors led to the outbreak of war in 1939? 1. What challenges were faced by the Weimar Republic from 1919 to 1923? ★ The Weimar Republic was Germany’s new democratic government after WW1. Faced many problems in the first few years of power. ★ Following Germany’s surrender, many people were unhappy and disillusioned. ★ The terms of the Versailles Treaty were very harsh. Germans felt betrayed, bitter and desperate for revenge. ★ Weimar faced challenges to its power: Spartacist Uprising, Kapp Putsch, Munich Putsch, the Ruhr Crisis ★ Hyperinflation Key words Weimar Republic Democracy Coalition Treaty Reparations KPD Spartacists Communists Putsch Kapp Ruhr Passive resistance Hyperinflation 2. Weimar recovers! Was the period 1924 to 1929 a ‘golden age’? ★ The economy recovered: Dawes Plan; a new currency called the Rentenmark; the Young Plan; too dependent on US loans? ★ A number of successes abroad: the Locarno Pact; the League of Nations; the Kellogg- Briand Pact; the role of Stesemann. ★ Political developments: support for the moderate parties; lack of support for the extremist parties. ★ Social developments: improved standard of living (housing, wages, unemployment insurance); the status of women improved; cultural changes Key words Dawes Plan Recovery Locarno League of Nations Kellogg-Briand Stresemann 3. -
The German Military and Hitler
RESOURCES ON THE GERMAN MILITARY AND THE HOLOCAUST The German Military and Hitler Adolf Hitler addresses a rally of the Nazi paramilitary formation, the SA (Sturmabteilung), in 1933. By 1934, the SA had grown to nearly four million members, significantly outnumbering the 100,000 man professional army. US Holocaust Memorial Museum, courtesy of William O. McWorkman The military played an important role in Germany. It was closely identified with the essence of the nation and operated largely independent of civilian control or politics. With the 1919 Treaty of Versailles after World War I, the victorious powers attempted to undercut the basis for German militarism by imposing restrictions on the German armed forces, including limiting the army to 100,000 men, curtailing the navy, eliminating the air force, and abolishing the military training academies and the General Staff (the elite German military planning institution). On February 3, 1933, four days after being appointed chancellor, Adolf Hitler met with top military leaders to talk candidly about his plans to establish a dictatorship, rebuild the military, reclaim lost territories, and wage war. Although they shared many policy goals (including the cancellation of the Treaty of Versailles, the continued >> RESOURCES ON THE GERMAN MILITARY AND THE HOLOCAUST German Military Leadership and Hitler (continued) expansion of the German armed forces, and the destruction of the perceived communist threat both at home and abroad), many among the military leadership did not fully trust Hitler because of his radicalism and populism. In the following years, however, Hitler gradually established full authority over the military. For example, the 1934 purge of the Nazi Party paramilitary formation, the SA (Sturmabteilung), helped solidify the military’s position in the Third Reich and win the support of its leaders. -
Link to Nazi Control KO
Eight Steps to Becoming Dictator (Rigged German Election Leads To Psychopath Nazi Nazi Control Assessment 3 Fuhrer) 1 Reichstag Fire - 27 Feb 1933 If you are asked about how Hitler The Reichstag (the German Parliament) burned down. Hitler used it as an consolidated his power, remember that the question is not just about excuse to arrest many of his Communist opponents, and as a major platform describing what happened and what R in his election campaign of March 1933. The fire was so convenient that Hitler did. You should many people at the time claimed that the Nazis had burned it down, and then explain how Hitler's actions helped him just blamed the Communists. to consolidate his power - it is more 2 General Election - 5 March 1933 about the effects of what he did. The Hitler held a general election, appealing to the German people to give him a table below describes how certain events that happened between 1933 and G clear mandate. Only 44% of the people voted Nazi, which did not give him a 1934 gave Hitler the opportunity to majority in the Reichstag, so Hitler arrested the 81 Communist deputies consolidate power. (which did give him a majority). Goering become Speaker of the Reichstag. 3 Enabling Act - 23 March 1933 The Reichstag voted to give Hitler the power to make his own laws. Nazi stormtroopers stopped opposition deputies going in, and beat up anyone who E dared to speak against it. The Enabling Act made Hitler the dictator of The Police State Germany, with power to do anything he liked - legally.