Posted on 03/22/2005 7:20:59 AM PST by Pikamax
How Germans Fell for the 'Feel-Good' Fuehrer
By Jody K. Biehl in Berlin
Hitler not only fattened his adoring "Volk" with jobs and low taxes, he also fed his war machine through robbery and murder, says a German historian in a stunning new book. Far from considering Nazism oppressive, most Germans thought of it as warm-hearted, asserts Goetz Aly. The book is generating significant buzz in Germany and it may mark the beginning of a new level of Holocaust discourse.
DER SPIEGEL Hitler took great care to pamper and coddle his people and they loved him -- and the Nazi regime -- for it. A well-respected German historian has a radical new theory to explain a nagging question: Why did average Germans so heartily support the Nazis and Third Reich? Hitler, says Goetz Aly, was a "feel good dictator," a leader who not only made Germans feel important, but also made sure they were well cared-for by the state.
To do so, he gave them huge tax breaks and introduced social benefits that even today anchor the society. He also ensured that even in the last days of the war not a single German went hungry. Despite near-constant warfare, never once during his 12 years in power did Hitler raise taxes for working class people. He also -- in great contrast to World War I -- particularly pampered soldiers and their families, offering them more than double the salaries and benefits that American and British families received. As such, most Germans saw Nazism as a "warm-hearted" protector, says Aly, author of the new book "Hitler's People's State: Robbery, Racial War and National Socialism" and currently a guest lecturer at the University of Frankfurt. They were only too happy to overlook the Third Reich's unsavory, murderous side.
Financing such home front "happiness" was not simple and Hitler essentially achieved it by robbing and murdering others, Aly claims. Jews. Slave laborers. Conquered lands. All offered tremendous opportunities for plunder, and the Nazis exploited it fully, he says.
Once the robberies had begun, a sort of "snowball effect" ensued and in order to stay afloat, he says Germany had to conquer and pilfer from more territory and victims. "That's why Hitler couldn't stop and glory comfortably in his role as victor after France's 1940 surrender." Peace would have meant the end of his predatory practices and would have spelled "certain bankruptcy for the Reich."
Instead, Hitler continued on the easy path of self deception, spurring the war greedily forward. And the German people -- fat with bounty -- kept quiet about where all the wealth originated, he says. Was it a deplorable weakness of human nature or insatiable German avarice? It's hard to say, but imagine if today's beleaguered government of German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder could offer jobs and higher benefits to the masses. "No one would ask where the money came from and they would directly win the next election," Aly says.
Stadtarchiv Oberhausen The Nazis helped themselves to Jewish wealth and used it to feed the war machine. Likewise, in the 1940s, soldiers on the front were instructed to ravage conquered lands for raw materials, industrial goods and food for Germans. Aly cites secret Nazi files showing that from 1941-1943 Germans robbed enough food and supplies from the Soviet Union to care for 21 million people. Meanwhile, he insists, Soviet war prisoners were systematically starved. German soldiers were also encouraged to send care packages home to their families to boost the morale of their wives and children. In the first three months of 1943, German soldiers on the Leningrad front sent more than 3 million packages stuffed with artifacts, art, valuables and food home, Aly says.
"About 95 percent of the German population benefited financially from the National Socialist system. The Nazis' unprecedented killing machine maintained its momentum by robbing from others. ... Millions of people were killed -- the Jews were gassed, 2 million Soviet war prisoners were starved to death ... so that the German people could maintain their good mood." By contrast, British Prime Minister Winston Churchill cajoled his people in 1940, just after France had fallen, to "brace ourselves to our duties" so that in a thousand years, "men will still say, this was their finest hour."
How to make a criminal regime thrive
DPA The Nazi war plunder had a snowball effect. If Hitler stopped it, the Reich would have been bankrupt. Aly's theory is not only fascinating for its brazenness, but also for the ruckus it is causing in Germany, where lately the trend has been to accept that Germans, too, suffered under Hitler and under the Allied bombing raids at the war's end. Aly is now negating much of that suffering, insisting that every single German benefited from Hitler's culture of killing. The Feuilleton, or cultural pages, of German newspapers -- which only recently exploded with coverage of the 60th anniversary of the liberation of Aushwitz -- have teemed with articles about Aly since the book, "Hitler's People's State" came out on March 10. In the left-leaning newspaper Die Tageszeitung, he has even engaged in an open fight with Cambridge economics historian Adam Tooze who has criticized the mathematical methods he used to substantiate his theory. Sales, too, are much better than he or his publisher imagined. "I didn't write the book for the lay person," he says. "It's crammed full of facts and dry historical and economic data and has close to 1,000 footnotes." But if people want to read it, he says he won't complain. It will come out in French this autumn and in English in 2006.
The timing for the book's German release, as his publishers well know, couldn't be better. Germany will spend the next six weeks hitting dozens of World War II anniversaries before arriving at memorial celebrations on May 8 and 9 marking 60 years since the war's end. It is also, says Aly, no coincidence that the work comes close to three generations after Hitler's suicide.
"The book could have been written 10 years ago, even 20 years ago," he says. All of the documents were there. We just weren't open to them. Personally, I didn't have the questions then."
The documents include reams of complex economic, bank and tax records as well as thousands of clippings from regional newspaper archives that Aly spent the past four years scouring. In the book, he uses them to support his theory that half the war was financed by government credit and that close to 70 percent of the rest came from plunder. "I am not trying to turn the history of National Socialism on its head," he insists. "But I think -- despite all the time that has passed -- it is still important to ask the most fundamental questions, namely how all this happened. What were the most important elements that allowed this criminal regime to thrive? So much came out of the German middle class. That is the most troubling aspect of the history."
AP Jewish slave workers toil at the Dachau concentration camp to benefit the Reich. Such ground has been broken before. In his 1996 bestseller, "Hitler's Willing Executioners: Ordinary Germans and the Holocaust," controversial Harvard professor Daniel Goldhagen -- an American Jew -- dared to point his finger at average Germans and insist they not only knew about the Third Reich atrocities, but in their rabid anti-Semitism were eager co-conspirators. And for decades, historians have spoken of Hitler's popular appeal, his ability to head off unemployment and shore up the nation's shoddy infrastructure. In fact, Germany's famous "Autobahn" (highway) is sometimes called the "Hitler Bahn" because it was built by the Nazis. His Napola and Adolf Hitler schools famously cut through social classes, admitting rich and poor to Nazi indoctrination. Still, until now, economists have struggled to prove that the plunder from abroad really drove the war machine.
Perhaps, says Aly, that is partly because German historians weren't ready to look at what he calls "secondary" questions about the structural and financial underpinnings of the Nazi war machine. "Writing about them would have reduced the human scale of the tragedy," he says. Plus, he insists, it is always "much easier to say it was the fault of a small group of elites, the power-crazed SS commanders, or even big businesses" than to point to your own greed. German society has spent decades digesting and "perhaps now we have reached a new level," he says.
Were Germans liberated from the Nazis, too?
REUTERS German President Horst Koehler bows in memory at Auschwitz. Do Germans belong at Holocaust memorial ceremonies? Current politics seems to mirror this sentiment. These days, making use of an agile word and mind flip, Germans have begun to insist that they -- like the rest of Europe -- were also liberated on May 8, 1945. They say it marks the day they and their children were freed from Nazi oppression. Still, in 1945, says Aly, Germans didn't think they were being liberated. "They had to be liberated from themselves," he says. "That's the problem."
In truth, Germans have made great strides in accepting their guilt and have even "liberated themselves," enough that it is now politically acceptable for German politicians to participate in World War II anniversaries in other countries. In May, Gerhard Schroeder became the first German chancellor to participate in a D-Day celebration. In January, German President Horst Koehler bowed his head at Auschwitz in memory of the 1.5 million people killed before the Red Army liberated the camp. Another trip is planned to Moscow for May celebrations.
Scholarship and even more delicately, German Holocaust sensitivities, too have progressed in recent years. In January, the first post-war German-Jewish comedy, "Alles Auf Zucker" (Bet it all on Zucker) was released and became an immediate box office hit. Before its release, film and television executives had long held that any productions involving Jews and Germans meant poison at the box office. Germans are also starting to talk about their own suffering during the war, particularly during the relentless Allied bombing of German cities such as Dresden. Aly accepts such suffering as truthful, saying talking about it shows that Germans have made advances from the shame-faced decades just after the war when no German academic could look at the war objectively. The question, he says is, "how do you relegate that suffering? We were also victims of our own aggression."
The important thing, he says is that German perspectives continue to evolve. He sees his book as an important part of that process. "I think in 10 years, because of this book, our understanding will be very different than it was less say a year ago," he says. "That's because my book contains a large number of short descriptions and sketches, and I am quite certain that the questions I ask will be investigated by my colleagues. That will definitely give us a lot more information. I notice it already in the echo from the book. I am getting letters from families who corroborate what I write. I'm sure more of that will come."
And how much of that was ever more than smoke ?
The German right knew it was smoke. They knew the Nazis weren't going to be collectivizing their wealth.
Laissez faire may be how Americans define conservatism but it was never how Europeans defined conservatism. So to follow your logic, Louis XIV was a socialist.
This wartime capitalism of which you speak - would that be President Wilson's War Production Board, cited by many as the inspiration for both Lenin's Soviet central planning and the sundry futuristic and utopian schemes endemic in the post-WWI era?
Socialism comes in many guises - what distinguishes it from other belief systems is its ostensible elevation of the good of society as a whole over all subsidiary or individual goods.
With that characteristic, you have socialism, whatever the 'central committee' chooses to call its own particular Big Lie.
All in my not-so-humble opinion.
"Once you've build this huge army that your economy cannot support, the only thing you can do is set it off in search of plunder to sustain it."
We better keep a close eye on China!
Which are you, Democrat or Liberaltarian?
That's your answer? THAT??
In other words: you know nothing about the political and economic policies put in place by the Nazis. You cannot describe these policies as either "right" or "left" because you are ignorant about what those policies might have been.
Multiple people are posting to you with actual facts and quotations from the Nazi regime which show quite clearly that the Nazis supported a powerful central state for purposes of social engineering.
And you close your eyes to all that? Why? I'd say because you identify yourself as a Leftist, but do not want to be associated with a political party like the Nazis. Too bad.
"This wartime capitalism of which you speak - would that be President Wilson's War Production Board, cited by many as the inspiration for both Lenin's Soviet central planning and the sundry futuristic and utopian schemes endemic in the post-WWI era?"
Don't pin it on Wilson. ALL of the warring countries had controlled rationed command economies because raw material shortages were rampant and priorities had to be set. In 1915 the armies of Europe ran out of shells and there wasn't time for a "free market" "laissez faire" response when your soldiers are fighting and dying. The material needs of the armies could not be met by free market laissez faire.
Your blunder is you keep trying to impose American definitions of right and left on Europe. European conservatism never had anything to do with "laissez faire" or "free market" or "gun control" or anything that you define as conservative.
Your defintions of right and left have nothing to do with Europe's.
"Multiple people are posting to you with actual facts and quotations from the Nazi regime which show quite clearly that the Nazis supported a powerful central state for purposes of social engineering."
ALL EUROPEANS right and left, supported a powerful central state for purposes of social engineering. Free market libertarianism, what you define as conservatism, did not exist in the continental European political menu.
You post this in order to bolster your argument that the National Socialists were not socialist?
"Tens of thousands of Catholic priests were murdered in concentration camps."
As was Dietrich Bonhoeffer, the outspoken anti-Nazi Lutheran pastor. From a bio: "Dietrich Bonhoeffer was born in Breslau in 1906. The son of a famous German psychiatrist, he studied in Berlin and New York City. He left the safety of America to return to Germany and continue his public repudiation of the Nazis, which led to his arrest in 1943. Linked to the group of conspirators whose attempted assassination of Hitler failed, he was hanged in April 1945. He was executed by special order of Himmler at the concentration camp at Flossenburg on April 9th, 1945, just a few days before it was liberated by the Allies."
The evil must always destroy the good, no matter whether it furthers their goals or not. It's a compulsion to them, simply because the existence of goodness reproaches their evil.
If you haven't read Bonhoeffer's "The Cost of Discipleship", you might want to. It's a powerful classic, and he certainly had the moral stature, had demonstrated the moral fortitude to be a credible writer on the subject.
In an age of warring great powers there were no small government libertarians.
You said that the Nazis were socialists because they wanted a strong central state. Well, everybody in Europe wanted a strong central state, right and left. Does that mean all Europeans were socialists ?
-------------------------------------------
In the sameway that the GDR was a democratic republic?
Louis XIV wanted a strong central state for purposes of social engineering (i.e., creating a French race guerriere and annihilating the Huguenots). Does that make him a socialist ?
Exactly right - except that the American command economy was more efficient and productive than the European powers of the time.
People readily believed that such a system would be superior to the market, which appeared less 'modern'.
America, remember, was seen as the most 'progressive' state of the early 20th Century. Even by Communists.
"Any depiction of the Nazis as "socialist" collapses in the face of the unshakeable fact that fascist violence was entirely directed against the left."
First, let me say that from what I have read, yes Hitler was a "conservative". Fascism is to conservatism what Stalinism is to liberalism which is why I have to laugh whenever I hear someone call any and all democrats a communist. Both are the extremes that we as a people need to avoid because extreme anything just destroys.
Second, whether he was a liberal or a conservative does not really matter, nobody is critiquing his tax policies. His "issues" were a little deeper than that.
Norm MacDonald: In other entertainment news, one of the world's biggest stars just completed a whirlwind three week world tour. Tonight he's agreed to come to Update to tell us about it. Ladies and gentlemen, David Hasselhoff!
[Much applause for Hasselhoff who wears a leather Planet Hollywood jacket.]
David Hasselhoff: Thank you! Thank you very much! [laughs at all the applause] My recent world tour was an incredible experience. I went to twenty-one countries in just fifteen days and I've got some amazing stories to tell. In Japan, for instance- instance, I was invited to the state dinner at the Emperor's Palace. What I didn't know was the emp--
Norm MacDonald: Hey! Whoa! Whoa! Whoa! Hang on a second. Did you just say Japan?
David Hasselhoff: Yes, I did.
Norm MacDonald: Yeah, well, no offense, you know, but I don't think anybody cares about Japan. Why don't you, ah, why don't you focus on the countries where you're, you know, you're popular?
David Hasselhoff: Oh. Well, in China we had an incredible experience. The entire cast of "Baywatch" was invited to the Great Wall where hundreds of thousands of Chinese people were chanting in unison, "Baywatch, Ba--"
Norm MacDonald: Whoaaaaa, whoaaa. Wait, wait. Chinese people?
David Hasselhoff: Yes, of course.
Norm MacDonald: Look, why don't we skip China? In fact, rule out all of Asia.
David Hasselhoff: Okay, okay. Well, I mean, what do you want to hear about? I mean, I've got some great stories from all over the world.
Norm MacDonald: Oh, yeah? I was thinking, you know, ah, some place where you're especially popular, you know, like in, uh, Europe.
David Hasselhoff: Oh! Well, in Italy--
Norm MacDonald: Northern Europe, Northern Europe!
David Hasselhoff: Oh, I got you. I got you. Okay. I got you. There's one country that they absolutely love me -- Norway.
Norm MacDonald: Norway?! What, are you crazy?! They like everybody in Norway! Nobody gives a damn about Norway! What the hell's wrong with ya?
David Hasselhoff: Look, ah, what's going on here? I've never seen you like this.
Norm MacDonald: Well, ahhhh, to tell you the truth, you know, I didn't want to be the one to bring it up but, uh, what about Germany? I mean, how do the - how do the Germans feel about ya?
David Hasselhoff: Well, on this trip, we actually didn't stop in Germany--
Norm MacDonald: I don't care about your stupid trip!! Look, just tell me how you would characterize -- in one sentence -- the way Germans feel about you.
David Hasselhoff: Well, I've always been fortunate to get a very positive response from the Germans--
Norm MacDonald: Oh, my God! This is no time for false modesty! We're runnin' late, we gotta wrap this thing up! Do Germans love you?
David Hasselhoff: Well, "love" is an awfully strong word...
Norm MacDonald: [hand to head] Oh, listen, David, uh... Let's say a guy had a theory, all right?
David Hasselhoff: All right.
Norm MacDonald: A theory that he's devoted several years of his life to. And let's say he has a lot of evidence to back up this theory of his.
David Hasselhoff: All right.
Norm MacDonald: [puts a large pile of documents, file folders, etc., on desk -- Hasselhoff is stunned] Now, don't you think it would just be common courtesy to help that guy out, you know, and not - not ruin his life?
David Hasselhoff: Listen, I don't know what you want me to say here, pal.
Norm MacDonald: Oh my God, here, I'll write it down. [searches his pockets for a pencil, finds one, scribbles something on a piece of paper and gives it to David] Here! Say this!
David Hasselhoff: [puzzled, reads from paper] "Germans love me."
[Camera pans quickly from Hasselhoff to a beaming MacDonald who addresses the camera.]
Norm MacDonald: Which once again proves my theory: Germans love David Hasselhoff! [Cheers and applause.] And that's the news! See you next time. Thank you, David. [fusses with his pile of documents]
David Hasselhoff: [waves good-bye] Auf wiedersehen! [?], meine liebe! Auf wiedersehen! Auf wiedersehen!
No, I'd say the German heavy industrial sector was more efficient then.
Hindenburg Germany went quite far in developing a command economy. When it is combined with wartime hate propaganda you see the beginnings of the modern totalitarian state.
That was my thought....just wonder who were the MJ's, Scott Peterson's, Robt. Blakes of Hitler's day that helped to keep everyone's focus shifted on total nonsense instead of what was happening right under their noses. "Homeland" (Security) has a Deutschland/Fatherland ring to it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.