New research on Nazism and Christianity

Notes and presentation on research into the official Nazi views on religion, and a consideration of 'ordinary' Christian response to the rise of the Nazis in Germany.

Nazism, political religion and 'ordinary' Germans

This paper examines the topic of Nazism and religion by taking one of the dominant schools of thought––that Nazism was a ‘political religion’––and dealing directly with an issue that is often encountered when teaching the history of the Nazi Party. A common question raised by students is this: what could be known about the Nazis when they came to power? While formulated in different ways and sometimes with a different chronological focus the core of this question is one of historicism. It may be abundantly clear to us now what the Nazis stood for, how racist and antisemitic they were, but what could be known by people then, and how did they view the Nazis? Given my sense that many teachers encounter this questions I believe it may be a useful prism through which to view Nazism and religion. The paper does so through using a case-study of the 'Temple Society' (Tempelgesellschaft), examining how members of this Christian community understood Nazism on the cusp of 1933.

France and the German refugee crisis of 1993

Initially liberal in its response to refugees from Nazism in 1933, France soon closed its borders to them. Thereafter, refugees encountered a regime of exclusion and antipathy. Historians confront the problem of explaining the reasons for exclusion. Anti-Semitism is often alleged to be motive-force, but this misleadingly imposes on an earlier period our understanding of the Vichy regime and its anti-Jewish legislation. This article investigates the nature of the French responses to those in flight from persecution in Nazi Germany in 1933, and questions whether it is proper to study this period in the context of events after 1940. It argues instead that French refugee policy in the 1930s emerged from the context of anti-foreign measures implemented in response to the economic stress of the late 1920s. Its study of the crisis in 1933 identifies the pressures that shaped France's exclusionary policies and its antipathy to the plight of the refugees.

A semiotic view of Dewey's times and Habermas's lifeworlds

John Dewey (1859-1952) explained how life was ‘corporatised’ at the time of rampant, laissez faire capitalism in early 20th century America. This paper refers Dewey’s observations to Habermas’s notions of the colonisation of the lifeworld. The semiotic and pragmatist approaches of Charles Saunders Peirce are then enlisted to look further into these lifeworld changes. The
paper suggests modifications to Habermas’s schema to bring it more in line with Dewey’s empirical account. It puts together a theoretically and empirically informed picture of the contemporary disruption to ways of living and the accompanying social and political instability. The paper then goes on to suggest how that instability appears to have been quelled by communicative means. These stages of: (1) stability; (2) disruption/instability; and (3) the regaining of stability are compared to Habermas’s notions of: (1) an original lifeworld; (2) colonisation of that lifeworld by the consequences of purposive rational activity; then (3) communicative action which ‘rebuilds’— that is which replaces or modifies or reforms or repairs—the disrupted lifeworld in order to create a new lifeworld. ‘Colonisation’ could be said to have provoked social instability. Notions of building a new ‘lifeworld’—a new cultural and psychic reference—could be said to correspond with attempts to resume social and political stability. The implication is that whatever the degree of purposive rationalism there is always a need for a return to some level of shared values and
understandings which imply communicative rationality. This ‘return’ or ‘counter-colonisation’ can be thought of as operating via a ‘lifeworld negotiation’ which might best be understood with reference to a Peircean based pragmatism-semiotic theory of human subjectivity. This paper
has been criticised for discussing “arguments” which: “would justify those who accommodated themselves to Nazism.” What this paper in fact tries to do is to use the concepts of the above three philosophers to try to account for the ways people think. This paper is not about justifying what philosophies people should hold. It is presumed that most readers are sensible and ethical and can make their own minds up in that respect. Rather it attempts to draw from Dewey, Habermas and Peirce to offer a characterisation of what philosophies might be argued to be held and to offer an explanation about how these modes of thinking might be said to have come into existence.
This paper rejects the notion that ones ‘will’ and thus the way one is able to think, is totally free and beyond the formative influences of the social-cultural context—including the influences of public relations and other persuasive discourse industries.

Nazi Germany as a christian state : the 'Protestant experience' of 1933 in Württemberg

 This article examines the response of Christians in Germany to the first year of the Nazi state. It responds to Manfred Gailus' call of 'micro-histories' and onsiders how Protestants in Württemberg conceived of 1933 and how they responded to the Nazis' antisemitism. It argues that they drew on a pre-existing myth of national-religious revival in World War I (the 'spirit of 1914') and remained 'actively passive' when it came to antisemitism.

Reassessing the Holy Reich: leading Nazis' views on confession, community and 'Jewish' materialism

 Returning to the Journal of Contemporary History debate on The Holy Reich, this article argues that the notion of 'positive Christianity' as  Nazi 'religious system' has been largely invented. It offers a close analysis of significant public statements on National socialism by three leading Nazis: Adolf Hitler, Gottfried Feder and Alfred Rosenberg.

The Nazis’ use of ‘Sieg Heil’: a point of continuity with the Völkisch movement

This historical note briefly considers the history of the phrase ‘Sieg Heil,’ using excerpts from original sources. It argues that this phrase, and the swastika, marked points of continuity with the earlier völkisch movement.

Were the National Socialists a Völkisch Party? Paganism, Christianity, and the Nazi christmas

A trend in studies about National Socialism and religion in recent years argues for a deliberate distinction between the Nazi Party (NSDAP) and the antisemitic völkisch movement of nineteenth-century Germany. This article challenges that contention. Several researchers have published comprehensive studies on the heterogeneous nature of Christian responses to the Nazis, but a comparable approach looking at how the Nazis viewed religion has not yet been undertaken. A study of the latter type is certainly necessary, given that one of the consistent features of the völkisch movement was its diversity. As Roger Griffin has argued, a “striking feature of the sub-culture . . . was just how prolific and variegated it was . . . [T]he only denominator common to all was the myth of national rebirth.” In short, the völkisch movement contained a colorful, varied, and often bewildering range of religious beliefs.

The League of Nations and the Refugees from Nazi Germany. James G. McDonald and Hitler’s victims

Greg Burgess's important new study explores the short life of the High Commission for Refugees (Jewish and Other) Coming from Germany, from its creation by the League of Nations in October 1933 to the resignation of High Commissioner, James G. McDonald, in December 1935.The book relates the history of the first stage of refugees from Germany through the prism of McDonald and the High Commission. It analyses the factors that shaped the Commission's formation, the undertakings the Commission embarked upon and its eventual failure owing to external complications.The League of Nations and the Refugees from Nazi Germany argues that, in spite of the Commission's failure, the refugees from Nazi Germany and the High Commission's work mark a turn in conceptions of international humanitarian responsibilities when a state defies standards of proper behaviour towards its citizens. From this point on, it was no longer considered sufficient or acceptable for states to respect the sovereign rights of another if the rights of citizens were being violated. Greg Burgess discusses this idea, amongst others, in detail as part of what is a crucial volume for all scholars and students of Nazi Germany, the Holocaust and modern Jewish history.