A Very Broad Subject Indeed
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Hans Günter Hockerts, Christiane Kuller. Nach der Verfolgung: Wiedergutmachung nationalsozialistischen Unrechts in Deutschland?. Göttingen: Wallstein Verlag, 2003. 288 S. EUR 20.00, broschiert, ISBN 978-3-89244-625-5. Reviewed by Gregory Schroeder Published on H-German (December, 2005) This remarkable collection of essays, emerg‐ lection does much to correct that imbalance. ing from the third Dachauer Symposium zur Zeit‐ Hockerts's title refers to Wiedergutmachung as geschichte sponsored by the city of Dachau in Oc‐ "ein weites Feld," thus bringing to mind Theodor tober 2002, addresses one of the most important Fontane's masterpiece, Effi Briest. In that novel, yet controversial concepts in post-National Social‐ Effi's father habitually halts uncomfortable dis‐ ist Germany: reparations (Wiedergutmachung) for cussions with the assertion, "Das ist ein weites victims of the Third Reich. One of the pioneers of Feld." Unlike Effi's father, the authors of this col‐ Wiedergutmachung, Franz Böhm, suggested that a lection have explored many different aspects of person's views of the Third Reich were reflected Wiedergutmachung rather than cite the vastness in his stance on Wiedergutmachung (p. 205); we of the subject as an excuse to avoid unpleasant might say in similar fashion that one's views on topics. They have demonstrated that Wiedergut‐ Wiedergutmachung reflected the sort of postwar machung is a broad subject indeed, worthy of Germany he wanted to create. "Making things much study. right again," or the reluctance to do so, has been The collection covers the period 1945-2003, in many respects at the heart of postwar German and its organization is generally chronological. identity. Most essays pertain to the Federal Republic, al‐ Most readers will likely associate Wiedergut‐ though two address the German Democratic Re‐ machung with German-Israeli relations in the public and two examine the post-unification peri‐ 1950s, and this should be no surprise. In his intro‐ od. Several essays examine aspects of Wiedergut‐ duction, Hans Günter Hockerts argues that, with machung as official, state-administered programs, the exception of the 1952 agreement with Israel, whereas others investigate non-state initiatives or the history of Germany's Wiedergutmachung has offer the perspectives of the victims/applicants. been largely neglected and unwritten, a "strag‐ The source bases for the essays include, among gler" among postwar investigations (p. 9). This col‐ others, records from federal agencies, state f‐ H-Net Reviews nance offices, church archives, letters from vic‐ would shape and complicate Wiedergutmachung tims/applicants, and professional legal journals after 1945. She identifies various "arenas" of per‐ pertaining to Wiedergutmachung. secution (pp. 37-39): in places such as concentra‐ In two introductory essays, editors Hans Gün‐ tion camps, prisons, and medical facilities, and in ter Hockerts and Christiane Kuller provide the interactions with officials, within one's profession, framework and foundation, respectively, for the and in public life. The victims were persecuted by collection. In "Wiedergutmachung: Ein umstrit‐ party, state, and "mixed" agencies, with varying tener Begriff und ein weites Feld," Hockerts ad‐ degrees of public support. Kuller emphasizes the dresses the problematic term Wiedergutmachung, great importance of the Second World War, which which draws criticism because of the impossibili‐ radicalized persecution within the Reich and ty of undoing the crimes of the Third Reich. He ar‐ transformed Nazi persecution into a European gues that the term is better understood in a "se‐ phenomenon. In occupied territories, the ideologi‐ mantic context" of associated ideas: to replace (er‐ cally determined character of the war blurred the setzen), to pay (bezahlen), and to atone for (süh‐ boundaries between persecution of civilian popu‐ nen) (p. 10), each of which is part of the concept lations and legitimate acts of war. Persecution "to make good again" (wiedergutmachen). Hock‐ took many forms, ranging from personal humilia‐ erts differentiates the various forms Wiedergut‐ tion to murder. Most important are Kuller's obser‐ machung has taken in the period 1945-2003: resti‐ vations about the difficulties in defining persecu‐ tution (Rückerstattung) for the loss of material tion in the postwar era, especially with respect to property; compensation (Entschädigung) for per‐ the legal concept of "victim of National Socialist sonal damages such as the loss of or damage to persecution" (Opfer nationalsozialistischer Verfol‐ one's health, freedom, or professional existence; gung). For example, it was often difficult to deter‐ privileges and special regulations in areas such as mine eligibility for compensation and, beyond social insurance; judicial rehabilitation, such as that, the nature and extent of damage and suffer‐ the restoration of citizenship; international ing. Furthermore, Wiedergutmachung was de‐ treaties; efforts to promote remembrance; and ini‐ signed to address the needs of German citizens, so tiatives emerging from non-state entities. In addi‐ it excluded the large majority of non-German vic‐ tion, Hockerts identifies recognized and "forgot‐ tims of the Third Reich. The subsequent articles ten" victim groups. This introductory essay pro‐ elaborate the difficulties Kuller sketches in her es‐ vides the necessary framework for understanding say. the significance of all the other articles (excepting Jürgen Lillteicher's essay "Die Rückerstattung the other introductory piece by Kuller). Hockerts's in Westdeutschland: Ein Kapitel deutscher Ver‐ assertion that Wiedergutmachung has always gangenheitspolitik?" deals with the restitution been "very closely interwoven with the struc‐ component of Wiedergutmachung, the one-time tures, ideas, and interests" prevalent in society at payments for the loss of property. Lillteicher has any given time (p. 8) is supported admirably found a great deal of resistance and a lack of un‐ throughout the collection. derstanding of Nazi crimes on the part of Ger‐ Kuller sketches the historical background in mans, arguing that British and U.S. influence was "Dimensionen nationalsozialistischer Verfolgung." essential to keep the program on track (p. 68). Oc‐ Its contents will be familiar to most readers who cupation-era restitution laws, reaffirmed in a have a solid understanding of the Third Reich, but treaty in 1952 between the Allies and the Federal Kuller's emphasis on the vastness of National So‐ Republic, formed the basis for the Bundesrücker‐ cialist persecution directs attention to aspects that stattungsgesetz (BRüG) of 1957. Lillteicher docu‐ ments the resistance of German officials, in partic‐ 2 H-Net Reviews ular those in the fnance offices and the Bundesfi‐ justified police measures; and actions against Je‐ nanzhof, who attempted in the early 1950s to col‐ hovah's Witnesses who refused to take part in the lect back taxes on restored property; the Allied war were considered necessary for the state in High Commission intervened to reverse this poli‐ time of war. There was no uniform practice for cy. Lillteicher fnds further resistance in connec‐ determining whether acts of resistance were wor‐ tion with the Rückerstattungsgeschädigte or thy of compensation, and communists were typi‐ "restitution-damaged": Germans who had ac‐ cally excluded because it was determined that quired the property of victims and were com‐ they had worked in the service of another totali‐ pelled to return or sell back the property to the tarian system. Pawlita argues that the courts act‐ rightful owners. He interprets the organization of ed subjectively and served a state-supporting these people and the political response to their de‐ (staatstragende) function in the early years of the mands (inclusion in the Lastenausgleich) to be an Federal Republic. A relatively restrictive under‐ important sign that Germans rejected the pro‐ standing of persecution served not only fscal but gram of Rückerstattung and even came to view it also political ends; reducing the range of "typical as more of an injustice than the crime that justice National Socialist injustice" allowed the actions of was designed to address (p. 73). the German Reich or nation to be separated from In "Der Beitrag der Rechtsprechung zur the actions of the Third Reich (pp. 99-101). Entschädigung von NS-Unrecht und der Begriff In "Zwei Wege der Wiedergutmachung? Der der politischen Verfolgung," Cornelius Pawlita Umgang mit NS-Verfolgten in West-und Ost‐ demonstrates that, in the absence of clear guide‐ deutschland im Vergleich," Constantin Goschler lines, implementation of compensation compares Wiedergutmachung in East and West (Entschädigung) laws depended greatly on the with respect to the political decision-making pro‐ courts' interpretations. The concept of political cesses behind the compensation, the legal founda‐ persecution as stipulated in the Bunde‐ tions and ideological assumptions of each system, sergänzungsgesetz (BErG) of 1953 posed many and the functioning of the two approaches in ac‐ problems, and it fell to the courts to determine tion. Goschler's approach illuminates two vastly who had been persecuted and who had not. The different approaches to Wiedergutmachung, each courts established that to be considered a political clearly rooted in its emerging postwar political persecutee, one had to have acted specifically system. West Germany approached Wiedergut‐ against the Third Reich because of a genuine, in‐ machung with an arcane, bureaucratized struc‐ ner conviction (Überzeugung),