Division, turmoil, and sabotage these are just some of the characteristics that made up post war Germany. After the end of the First World War and the abdication of Kaiser Wilhelm II Germany was transformed from authoritarian state to a representative democracy. This new government was poisoned from the start with the “stab in the back” legend and the Treaty of Versailles. Between the failings of the government and the rise of far right extremism a new form of ultra-nationalism was forming in Germany. In his book The Rise of the New Nationalism, the German essayist, Friedrich Jünger, describes why Germany must adopt the mindset of the ultra-nationalists or, as he puts it, “the new nationalists.” Jünger believes that for Germany to become powerful …show more content…
A distaste for non-Germans was not a new idea at the time, but it really took hold after general Erich Ludendorff created the “Stab-in-the-back” myth. This myth states that Germany did not lose the war, but was sabotaged by the Jews, socialists, Weimar politicians, and even Catholics. Right wing extremists used this to sow dissent and hatred for the government and foreigners. It is with this mindset that Jünger believes that nationalism is the only “guarantor of Germany’s collective future” and they must begin “preserving indigenous culture and destroying the alien elements that arrogantly push against it.” Jünger continues by explaining that community is deeply connected trough “blood bonds.” These bonds begin to break when they are cut off or “seek nourishment from alien roots.” Jünger is saying, in a very poetic manner, that for Germans to have a sense of comradery or oneness they cannot be divided or tainted by non-German culture and blood. The author makes many metaphoric references to blood as this bonding force. For Jünger, there is one German people, all connected through German blood; a blood-bonded community. The new nationalists want to make this blood-bonded community stronger and to accomplish this all foreign bodies and internationalists must be removed from Germany. In Jünger’s own words, “They [alien blood & internationalists] have to …show more content…
The German military had been sabotaged by the liberals and foreigners at home. This resulted in Germany losing the war and the establishment of the Weimar Republic. According to Friedrich Jünger and the new nationalists this was an inexcusable offense and it must be remedied. To solve Germany’s problems, Jünger recommended the strengthen of the blood-bonded communities by removing all foreign influences. Furthermore, the liberal democracy that had conspired against Germany during the war needed to be torn down. Democracy also aided and abetted the foreign bodies in Germany, thus was an affront to the blood-bonded communities. Finally, for Germany to truly be successful they must reestablish the authoritarian regime originally designed by Otto von Bismarck. Only a strong dictator is capable to right the wrongs of the Weimar Republic and restore Germany. Jünger and the ultranationalists fanned the flames of dissent in the Germany which eventually lead to the collapse of the Weimar Republic. This ultimately paved the way for Nazism and the rise of Adolf Hitler, the dictator Friedrich Jünger
The first major reason that the Weimar republic failed was that it was extremely inefficient and did not have clear goals set within the government. All the different ideas coming from the parties in the republic, created a situation where the people of Germany were getting very unclear, vague messages. This problem can be seen in the struggle between the German Democratic Party and the Communist Party. Troeltsch, a theologian and leader of the German Democratic Party said, “The development will not stop at democracy, and a ‘dictatorship of the proletariat’ will assume the form of terrorist domination by a minority” (Doc 1). This statement is only somewhat reliable because Troeltsch was a politician, and he would benefit from over exaggerating what would happen if the opposing party were to gain control.
Rensmann, Lars. "Collective guilt, national identity, and political processes in contemporary Germany." Collective guilt: International perspectives (2004):
“The Bushmen are primitive and naturally so, but we are primitive in an artificial sense, and by virtue of the utmost effort” (274). This quote written by Erich Maria Remarque in All Quiet on the Western Front calls attention to the division and inhumanity of the masses in the first World War. Ordinary people hated others that were across a non-physical border because they were convinced that they were the enemy. However, Paul argues that the people who the soldiers are killing are not the enemies. The enemies are the people who don’t risk their lives on the battlefield yet think they can make decisions about a war where thousands are brutally killed everyday. The concept of nationalism is a prime example of the values and misconceptions of European people at the start of the 20th century.
Germany. Nationalism is a complex concept that can be viewed as both a unifying and a disunifying force, depending on one's perspective and background knowledge. On one hand, it can bring people together who share a common bond based on a single "nationality" or ancestry. Those who view nationalism as a unifying force often reject loyalty to a monarch, instead choosing to remain loyal to their fellow citizens. On the other hand, some people see nationalism as a disunifying force because it can disrupt efforts to restore the old order before the French Revolution.
The main purpose of the book was to emphasize how far fear of Hitler’s power, motivation to create a powerful Germany, and loyalty to the cause took Germany during the Third Reich. During the Third Reich, Germany was able to successfully conquer all of Eastern Europe and many parts of Western Europe, mainly by incentive. Because of the peoples’ desires and aspirations to succeed, civilians and soldiers alike were equally willing to sacrifice luxuries and accept harsh realities for the fate of their country. Without that driving force, the Germans would have given up on Hitler and Nazism, believing their plan of a powerful Germany...
German History Path The ‘German catastrophe’ that happened in the 20th century presented an unprecedented phenomenon that was difficult to explain given the previous historical development of the country. Specifically, the rise of Nazi Germany led to the radical changes in the country’s system of governance, social values, changes in social institutions etc that were unexpected from the point of view of history. The Sonderweg is a theory in historiography that emphasizes the idea that German path to democracy was unique, if compared to other counties in the West.
In order to successfully address this question, one must first consider the definition of the very nebulous term Volksgemeinschaft. It was an expression used to depict the harmonious, classless national community ideal made up of the Herrenvolk, or master race. As a term used polemically by the Nazis to engender a form of "identity politics" and therefore oppose any notion of politics based on universal and objective class interests that it aimed to transcend, it helped them gain collective support from an already economically, psychologically and politically distraught post-war nation. The Volksgemeinschaft ideal was one of the key elements of Nazi ideology and was used to legitimate much of the regime's social policy whilst also providing support for their opposition to liberal individualism and Marxist class antagonism. Although to some extent rather imaginary and mythical, it was the key component to encompass the National Socialist dogma of the party, one which integrated the collective Nationalist spirit with the Socialism of diminished class divisions. It operated as a form of psychological Gleischaltung toward the increasingly totalitarian restructuring of German society in a very radical way that disrupted traditional loyalties between members of the same social class, religion and group organisation towards a more Nazified awareness and consciousness. Every single German was obligated to unite with this community, to embrace and share the common faith. According to Hitler "No one is excepted from the crisis of the Reich. This Volk is but yourselves. There may not be a single person who excludes himself from this obligation." However, the Volksgemeinschaft ideal was flawed, it was duplicitous like much of Nazi policy. Con...
An exploration of Jewish mixed blood status in Nazi Germany renders a brief history of anticipatory racial conceptions leading up to the Third Reich. The use of Mischlinge as well as other labels intended to denote mixed blood naturally evolved out of well-established racial conceptions central to Germany and the Third Reich ideology. This ideology, which existed as “an uneasy fusion of different strands of racial elitism and popularism,” defined persons as according to not only their Rasse or racial identity, but also membership of the German people or Volk (Hutton 15, 18). The idea of the Volk denoted not only shared language and heritage as well as right of citizenship, but the ordained right to inhabit German lands. Above all, this idea concerned triumphant unification of a German people perceived to be under threat of dissolution by ethnic and religious groups such as the R...
“On 2 August 1934, President Hindenburg died. Within an hour of his death Hitler announced that the offices of chancellor and president were to be combined and that he was the new head of state. Hitler’s adolescent dream of becoming Fuhrer of the German people had been realized” President Hindenburg’s death marked the official end of the Weimar Republic, a democratic ‘experiment’ that had lasted since 1918. The causes of the dissolution of the Republic are wide ranging and numerous, as was explained in the articles of both Richard Bessel, and John McKenzie. The two author’s agree on the sequence of events which led to the dissolution of the Republic, however, they disagree on what exactly caused the transition from Weimar to the Third Reich. The author’s disagreement stem from a differing view of the fundamental cause, political structure versus political leadership.
The phrase "a lesson to be learned and a tragedy to behold" has been indelibly attached to the Holocaust that to think of it in any other way is thought to insult all those of the Jewish community who lost their lives to the attempted genocide of their race by the Nazi regime. Despite such brevity attached to learning lessons from the Holocaust one must wonder whether the lesson has actually been learned or if people will continue to repeat the mistakes of the past. Angela Merkel, the current German Chancellor, has stated that the German experiment towards multi-culturalism has failed, those who wish to migrate into the country must learn the German way whether it is the language they speak, the culture they have or the very religion they hold dear . Such sentiments seem to echo those of the former Third Reich which held the German way, the Aryan way, as the only path to which people should attempt to pursue. While this paper is not trying to vilify the current German government nor is it trying to compare it to the Third Reich, the fact remains that the steps their government is taking fall uneasily close to that of their vilified predecessor. The fact is though, the German government is merely following through with the popular sentiment of its citizenry who believe immigrants coming into the country disrupts the German way of life and all attempts to live side by side in peace have failed. Despite being a predominantly Christian nation who supposedly follow the way of Christ, to hear them say that makes one wonder whether their claims truly reflects their deeds. It is from this situation that the essay of Eckardt and its view that the Holocaust is a "Christian Problem" becomes relevant to what is happening in the world today.
Adolf Hitler came to power on February 28, 1933 (Rossel). He rose to power using inflammatory speeches and inspiring hope for the defeated Germans. He constructed a system to empower the German people and allow them to thrive in the period after the Great Depression (Noakes). Using keen acumen and decisive moves, he was able to turn Germany into a war machine bent on the creation of an Aryan utopian society, at the cost of all inferior races, especially the Jews ("The Period between 1933 and 1939"). At this time Germany was a defeated country. They had recently had numerous humiliating defeats in WWI, and the Germans no longer had the pride they once had celebrated (Laurita). Augmented by the fact that the Great Depression had ravaged the country and left many in a state of penury and impoverished, the Germans were desperate. As well, Germany was currently a country without any source of stability without a generally supported constitution. When Hitler promised a utopian society filled with hope and where the Germans would be exalted as the superior race, the Germans listened and obeyed his every word (Noakes). Hitler fed on the desperation and hopelessness of these German people to make a society driven by fear; this state of pity allowed Hitler to convince the Germans that he could provide a better future.
The German Weimar Republic was an attempt to make Germany a more democratic state. While this was a very good idea in theory, the Weimar Republic was ineffective due to the instability that came with it. Several factors contributed to the instability of Germany’s Weimar Republic, such as the new political ideals brought forward and the government’s hunger for war.
Turner, Henry Ashby. Germany from Partition to Reunification. New Haven, CN: Yale University Press, 1992. Print.
German people were unused to a democracy and blamed the government “November criminals”, for signing the Treaty of Versailles. From the very beginning, the new Weimar government faced opposition from both sides of the political spectrum. The Left wing Spartacist group, lead by Liebknecht and Luxemburg, looked up to the new Soviet councils in Russia, wanted to place Germany into a similar system.
“Bismarck and German Nationalism.” The American Historical Review Vol. 60, No.3 (1955): pg. 78. 548-556.