An Insight to Peter Fritzsche's "Germans into Nazis"

Many historians form their opinions of why and how dates cause dramatic historical events over the course of many centuries. For example, most historians believe Nazism began when the German military was defeated in 1918 which caused the uprising of Nazis in Germany. One historian however believed that this was not the case of how Nazism began in Germany. Peter Fritzsche states his argument in his book “Germans into Nazis,” he describes how Germans became Nazis on their own accord.
Fritzsche pin points in his argument that Nazism began precisely in August 1914 when Germans are clearly unified for the first time. This moment was referred to as “August Days” when the declaration of war caused a huge unity within the nation or “Volk” in Germany. Fritzsche states in his book how Hitler was among the Germans uniting for the war during 1914. “As Hitler himself reported, the declaration of war produced a sense of Germanness that filled him with ecstasy. … In his eyes the summer of 1914 was truly historic because it has created a new historical subject in world history—the German Volk—one unencumbered by the past history and past inequities and finally unified to claim its imperial destiny.” (Fritzsche, 07) Fritzsche further discusses that as the war effort continues for a couple years and the once unified nation begins dividing through politics. “… wartime censorship laws were relaxed and vigorous debates on war aims, unrestricted submarine warfare, and suffrage reform followed, revealing more clearly the political divisions of the German people, but also enlarging the parts they played in the political process. From Left to Right citizens mustered themselves in politics….” (Frizsche, 63,64) I feel that Frizsche’s argument is partially true. The “August Days” when Germans are unified for the first time and supporting the war effort could be considered the beginning influence of Nazism, but not necessarily the defining moment of Nazism.

Regulation of Prostitution and Cause of the War

Regulation of Prostitution
I found Richard Evans’ article entitled “PROSTITUION, STATE AND SOCIETY IN IMPERAL GERMANY”, had an interesting perspective about the interrelations between prostitution, state and society. The concept of regulating something such as prostitution during the nineteenth century is much like “trying” to regulate illegally downloaded music today. Meaning it is simply impossible to keep up with whom is doing what in every city. Evans’ article discusses how most cities attempted to regulate prostitution by registering the prostitutes under two specific clauses from the Imperial Criminal Code. “Clause 361/6 empowered the police to arrest and subject to a medical examination anyone the suspected of being a prostitute. Clause 180, whose implications were in contradiction to Clause 361/6, decreed that anyone who provided through his own agency an opportunity for the exercise of prostitution and so countenanced and furthered it, would be imprisoned.” The police were monitoring the prostitutes under Clause 361/6 and prostitutes could continue this lifestyle as long as they were registered and in the so called “red light districts.” On the other hand, according to Clause 180 procurers were to be imprisoned if they were caught providing opportunities for prostitution to occur. This is why I think that regulating prostitution is simply impossible, because most prostitutes are not willing to register. Many of these women were trying their best to maintain their households not making a living through prostitution. Therefore, the police were exposed to a partial view of the prostitution in Germany during the nineteenth century.
Cause of the War
I found David Kaiser’s article entitled “Germany and the Origins of the First World War”, had another interesting perspective about who really caused the First World War. Kaiser mentions how other historians believe the First World War was caused by Chancellor Theobald von Bethmann-Hollweg because he had ordered that the war should occur. It is true that he did order that the war should occur after being opposed to it prior to 1914. Kaiser argues that it was society’s actions which led to the war. Bethmann’s actions were actually the aftermath of society not participating in earlier elections. Kaiser describes that Bethmann’s actions were last resort and the people of Germany “needed” a war. I agree with Kaiser’s argument and feel that if society does not work together to make a country unified then the society will suffer with struggles such as war.

Radical Changes: An insight of the Peasants and Politcs in Germany, 1871-1914

David Blackbourn’s article “Peasants and Politics in Germany, 1871-1914” is an interesting article about Germany’s people and politics. He discusses how Germany has gone through significant changes from the nineteenth to the twentieth century. Blackbourn mentions several important changes and perceptions he found important while describing peasant life during this period. An important perception Blackbourn mentions was how Germany was predominantly rural and agricultural society during the nineteenth century and became an industrial society in the twentieth. I think Blackbourn thoroughly described the changes that occurred in four key aspects. The first aspect he discusses was how the rural society was simple and election participation were low to an extremely “political, co-operative, educational, recreational and enthusiastic election participation.” The second aspect was the economic changes which affected the German rural society after the 1870s threaten the Junkers while opening up opportunity to the peasantry. For example, the depression on grain prices allowed peasants to take advantage of the low prices rather than challenging the Junkers. The third aspect was the peasant’s dissatisfaction with the governmental institutions that were supposedly representing for ‘the corporate interests of agriculture,’ but rather were plotting political agendas in the 1880s. Blackbourn states an example, “… over the ostensibly less contentious issue of breeding policy, the lager landowners showed a keen interest in military and race horses, while the peasantry were more concerned with working animals.” The fourth aspect was the established parties that apparently closed the gap between themselves and the angry rural population. Blackbourn describes that the, “come-back of the old parties after the mid-1890s should ultimately be seen, in this perspective, as a provisional achievement.” I think that Blackbourn description of the peasantry life through the 1870s, 80s and 90s was extremely difficult due to the rapid differences from societal change from rural to urban.

GERMANY 19TH CENTURY

Theories about Germany during the Nineteenth Century

Germany’s government during the nineteenth century was greatly determined by the influence Bismarck had over the liberal parties. Many historians have argued about different theories explaining how liberalism has affected Germany during the nineteenth century and led towards Nazism. Among these historians are James Sheehan, Kenneth Barkin and Chris Lorenz and each have written articles sharing an insight to how liberalism had affected Germany during the nineteenth century.
Sheehan’s article called “German Liberalism in the Nineteenth Century,” discussed how Bismarck as the ‘Iron Chancellor’ needed the liberals to support him during the nineteenth century. His article mentioned how Bismarck tried to influence the liberals by proposing an indemnity bill. Sheehan states “A number of those in the Prussian Fortschrittspartei found Bismarck’s indemnity bill unacceptable. To them, it merely legalized the “gap theory,” which had allowed the minister-president to defy the parliament…,” which illustrated how liberalism affected Germany in the nineteenth century. Barkin’s article called “1878-1879 The Second Founding of the Reich, A Perspective,” discussed how Bismarck abandoned the liberals for a more conservative perspective. His article talks about how Bismarck left his liberal supporters for two Conservative parties. Barkin’s article further discussed the theory of how Bismarck’s abandonment of the liberals was how the ‘Iron Chancellor’ failed to keep his control over Germany. Lorenz’s article called “Beyond Good and Evil? The German Empire of 1871 and Modern German Historiography,” discussed how Bismarck aimed for a German Empire during the nineteenth century. His article mentions a theory of how Bismarck influenced liberalism in the nineteenth century by being an Imperial force. All and all, Bismarck was the primary influence on liberalism in the nineteenth century. Sheehan, Barkin and Lorenz’s articles all supported their individual theories explaining how liberalism has affected Germany during the nineteenth century.

My Thoughts about "Rhineland Radicals: THE DEMOCRATIC MOVEMENT AND THE REVOLUTION OF 1848-1849" by Jonathan Sperber

The Rhine River flows across Germany, Austria and continues to stretch as far as The Balkans. More importantly this river has been involved with the political aspects of Germany since the 1800s. During the 1848- 1849 time frame the Rhine river has been a political melting pot between the democratic movement and the revolution of 1848-1849. Jonathan Sperber discusses in his article, "Rhineland Radicals: The democratic movement and the revolution of 1848-1849", how the social conflicts within the Rhineland are contributed by the political aspects during 1848-1849. Jonathan Sperber mentions several examples of three types of social conflicts reflected in the Rhineland which are market (economy), state power and religious conflicts.

The social distress of the market caused many conflicts amongst the people in Rhineland during Vormärz. The Vormärz is the time period of rallying and questioning leading up to the revolution in 1848. The people of Germany did not have steady work and were questioning political intents for the markets. Jonathan Sperber writes about specific social conflicts within the market revolving around manufacturers. "Conflict centered around the terms of access to the market at a time when market-oriented production was on the increase. Found on the crafts and agriculture, such conflicts were most common in manufacturing outworking", this quote found in Jonathan Sperber's article explains how conflict in the market is a head to head battle between manufacturers and outworkers. One example of conflict is the issue of paying higher wages to the outworkers in the market. Jonathan Sperber discusses how manufacturers would rather be involved with "manufacturing tribunals" than pay higher wages. He states in his article, "The tribunals were a form of industrial mediation, designed to avoid the expense and delay of the civil courts, using lay judges empowered to resolve disputes and enforce their decisions by imposing small fines and handing out jail sentences of up to three days", which illustrates support to how manufacturers would rather be involved with the tribunals than pay the higher wages. This major conflict between manufacturers and outworkers in the market caused many social problems within the Rhineland.

*I finished this post but when I tried to publish it, I had been logged out and lost the other half.*

Test

Testing: 1... 2.... 3....