Situation in Germany under Nazi Control - Essay Example

Certain historians, like J. Wheeler-Bennett and L. Naimer, have argued that the July 1944 plot to assassinate Adolf Hitler and overthrow the Nazi government, was “an attempt by the old elites to preserve their social status” (Collier & Pedley, 2000). However, overwhelming evidence exonerates the plotters, at least in the court of posterity, of such greed. In fact, in assessing a statement of such nature and consequence, by way of rebuttal, it is highly necessary to present one’s argument from the perspective of the historical antecedents of the July 1944 plot. Gisevius (1998) describes the situation in Germany, under Nazi control in that period, as a nation whose leaders felt “only in terms of violence.” He further explains: How easily naked violence is spread & practiced! We can observe this even more in the sub-leaders than in Hitler… Party leaders and sub-leaders found themselves in positions of power beyond their wildest dreams… They had no professional training. They knew nothing about the law. They did not trust the professional officialdom who worked under them. They simply dictated, in the firm conviction that their subjects would obey… First, they conquered power. By means of power they achieved totality. Soon they tasted the pleasures of arbitrary rule. And then, swiftly, they plunged into excess… (pp 101 & 102). Thus began the savage rule which was to become a canker sore in the mouth of not only Europe, but the entire world for years. It is also interesting to note that several moves had been made to overthrow Hitler even before the war began. Even though it seems clear, it is important, at this point, to insist that the plot of July 1944 was not just an attempt by a bunch of renegade army officers to kill Adolf Hitler and take over his government, but a truly patriotic and humanitarian move to liberate and distance the German nation from the vices of greed, hate, genocide and absolutism, all of which the Nazi government embodied. Germany was in the heart of the Second World War, and there was a wanton killing of Jews in German concentration camps all over Europe. “If the plot had succeeded, the war could have been shortened, the slaughter ended and the lives of millions of Jews saved” (Holocaust Educational Trust of Ireland). At the immediate conception of the plot, however, opposition to Hitler’s government was not military, but simply political. But by the mid 1930’s, several trade and political opposition groups, which existed or voiced their discontent with his policies – most appalling of which was anti-Semitism, had been hammered into the ground. And as time went on, and Hitler’s chokehold on Germany was so tight that disaster became imminent, most anti-Nazis, according to Richard Lane, author of Loyalty and the Allies: Impediments to a Military Coup in Nazi Germany, “acknowledged that opportunities for political regime change had been exhausted and so attention turned to the military”. This had become necessary as “only the army had at its disposal the weapons and the power necessary to overthrow the firmly entrenched Nazi regime, which was supported by hundreds of thousands of SS troops. Civilian initiative [therefore] was fettered unless it had strong military backing” (Manvell & Fraenkel, 1964). But the military option undoubtedly had its own risk; primarily because the plotters’ objectives were on one hand, modest – they wanted to avoid bloodshed, but also dangerous – the coup could fail if Hitler, the head and symbol of the Nazi regime was left alive. Helena Schrader paints the composition and mood of the conspirators at the beginning: The most important resistance organization, however, was a coalition of active and retired military officers and civilians who worked to over-throw the Nazi regime and replace it with a government dedicated to restoring the Rule of Law.  This conspiracy initially hoped to put Hitler on trial for his crimes, but gradually recognized that only Hitlers elimination would reduce the risk of civil war. That being said, and having examined the situations and circumstances that culminated in the July 1944 bomb plot, it is necessary to examine the characters that were involved in the plot, since our argument is that they were not a bunch of faceless power mongers. In the words of McDonough (2001), “Hans Rothfels, the author of one of the first studies of the individuals and groups associated with 1944 bomb plot, claimed that the leading figures in military resistance – Stauffenberg, Goerdeler and Beck – were motivated by an ethical and moral hatred of Nazism and were united in a desire to forge a new Germany based on principles of freedom...” Commenting on the issue of treason and a soldier’s allegiance to the Fuehrer, Theo Kordt, one of the conspirators, argued that “the soldier’s oath is no longer valid since Hitler is planning to sacrifice Germany to his own diabolical aims.” Subsequent chapters will examine five of the conspiracy’s leaders and their roles in it (though all of them are worthy of mention), and will advance our argument further. Carl Goerdeler Described by Schlabrendorff (1965) as the engine “which drove the resistance movement forward through the depths of disappointment and over mountains of obstacles,” Carl Friedrich Goerdeler, a civilian, was perhaps the most idealistic of the July 1944 conspirators. While serving in the Nazi regime as Mayor of Leipzig, Goerdeler, according to Klaus-Jürgen (1985), cited in Wikipedia, had in the early 1930s, “considered Hitler an ‘enlightened dictator’, who, provided he received the proper advice, would be a force for good.” But he was to eat his words when he came to realize that Hitler’s Nazi regime, among other atrocities, was systematically eliminating racial and religious ‘undesirables’, particularly Jews. He resigned in protest. Said he in 1938: In the occupied areas and against the Jews, techniques of liquidating human beings and of religious persecution are practised… which will always rest as a heavy burden on our history.” (Arendt, 2006). Goerdeler, largely an idealist, did not initially intend to remove Hitler by force of arms. Still holding on to his belief in the Fuehrer as ‘enlightened’, he was convinced that Hitler “could be persuaded by reasoned argument to step down” (Kershaw, 2000). He was eventually persuaded by his more experienced associates to let go of that conviction. After the plot failed, Goerdeler was captured, tried and executed with his brother and eight other members of his family. His last words, according to Rothfels (2007), were “I ask the world to accept our martyrdom as penance for the German people.” Ludwig Beck His name had been marked as that of the successor to Hitler should the July 1944 coup plot succeed. He believed that the Fuehrer’s war policies were destructive to Germany. Having served as Hitler’s Chief of the Army General Staff up to the late 1930s, Beck, who is described as a spiritually inclined soldier, had consistently advised that “Germany was not physically ready for war and that Hitler’s aggressive foreign policy would lead to a world war and consequent disaster for Germany.” His agitation was further fueled by the advance of the Allies into German territory. With Hitler out of the picture, he could broker a settlement of the war with the Allies and stop the further destruction of lives and property. He opted to commit suicide after the plot failed and he was arrested, to protect his family from execution. Claus Schenk Graf von Stauffenberg Born, raised and growing up a Catholic aristocrat, who still held Imperial beliefs (Wikipedia), Stauffenberg was not interested in the resistance in the beginning, despite urging from his uncle, Nikolaus Graf von Üxküll-Gyllenband. But he was soon to change his mind after the conquest of Poland. One writer describes his conversion thus: “It was during the German campaign against the Soviet Union, which began in June 1941, that Stauffenberg became disillusioned with Hitler’s rule. In August 1942, he told a friend: ‘They are shooting Jews in masses. These crimes must not be allowed to continue.” (McDonough, 2001) After being badly wounded in an Allied air raid in Tunisia, Stauffenberg returned to Germany for treatment and rehabilitation. Soon after his recovery, having lost his right hand, two fingers on his left, and his left eye, he joined and was fully committed to the resistance cause. Within months, or even weeks, Stauffenberg rose from new recruit to the spearhead of the operation. Ironically, his handicap contributed to this rise. As the time of the coup drew near, the hopes of the plot hung on him, after Helmuth Stieff, who originally was supposed to assassinate Hitler, backed out. Stauffenberg took on the duty. He was to plant an explosive, which would kill Hitler and whoever else was with him, in Rastenburg, and then head all the way back to Berlin to lead the coup – “because he was the only one who could lead the coup” (Hoffmann, 2003). Said Phillip Von Boselager (one of the many conspirators) of him: I met him (Stauffenberg), but we never talked, that was unsafe we just nodded. I admired him; just imagine that a man with three fingers and one eye could execute such a difficult attempt. I very much admire his courage (Operation Valkyrie: The Definite Story, 2009). Hours after the plot failed, Stauffenberg, along with three other officers, was executed at the orders of Friedrich Fromm (another conspirator), who was trying to cover up his involvement in the plot. The character of Claus von Stauffenberg has been portrayed from various perspectives in the film media and literature. He was undoubtedly the most valiant of the July 1944 plotters. Hans Oster “A man such as God meant men to be (Shirer, 1990),” was how Hans Oster was described by an associate. He had fallen out with Hitler after the “Night of the Long Knives” massacre, when the latter’s SS arrested and murdered many leaders of the Nazis’ political opposition. His disillusionment with the Nazi regime was deepened after the “Crystal Night” massacre of Jews in December 1938. He also saw reason with Beck on the destructive nature of the war to Germany, and was part of a failed pre-emptive coup to nip it in the bud. He even leaked information of the planned German invasion of the Netherlands to Dutch intelligence officers, to prevent Germany from having an early victory. When that also failed, and WWII broke out he vowed to put a stop to it – even if it meant overthrowing or even killing the Fuehrer in the process. Said he: There are those who will say that I am a traitor, but I truly am not. I consider myself a better German than all those who run after Hitler. My plan and my duty is to free Germany, and with it the world, of this pestilence (Moorhouse, 2007). In the words of Rothfels (2007), “Oster acted both from feelings of indignation and European solidarity and also with the aim of avoiding a total defeat for his country by incurring a smaller military reverse which would make it possible to overthrow the regime.” He was arrested and executed barely two days after the July plot failed. Henning von Tresckow Tresckow’s grievances against the Nazi regime were about the same as Oster’s – anti-Semitism, military recklessness and political domination. And he simply could not abide anything mean or unjust, which was what thrived under Hitler (Hoffmann, 1996). Having relentlessly plotted time and again since 1940, each time failing to eliminate Hitler, but yet undaunted, Tresckow was very instrumental in the planning of the July 1944 attempt. When it appeared that the July plot might not succeed, and that his fellow conspirators seemed to be losing steam, he admonished them, at that point, that the aim of the plot was “no longer the practical purpose of the coup, but to prove to the world and for the records of history that the men of the resistance dared to take the decisive step. Compared to this objective, nothing else is of consequence. (Fest & Little, 1997).” Like some of his fellow comrades, Tresckow committed suicide with a hand grenade after the plot failed. The list of patriotic Germans, who sought to return sense to their home land, is endless. “History,” contends William Kennedy, “has been very kind to the conspirators who attempted this daring coup détat. They are heralded as heroes and as allies in the war against Hitler. The primary architect of this conspiracy was Claus von Stauffenberg and he especially is honoured as a valiant soldier who sought to destroy the despotic figure of Adolf Hitler. In major cities throughout Europe, the United States and even Israel streets and parks have been named after Stauffenberg in honour of his bold effort to annihilate the Nazi Hierarchy.” It is also important to note the efforts of Wilhelm Leuschner and the labour unions in the resistance cause. A union leader, former city councillor and World War One veteran, he had been tortured and imprisoned for his defiance to the Nazi government. Upon his release, he joined the Goerdeler/Beck/Stauffenberg resistance group, although indirectly. He had been named as the would-be Vice Chancellor should the coup succeed. After the coup’s failure and his arrest, the Gestapo, says Mommsen (2003), “found it hard to understand why a man like Leuschner, who was managing a successful business, important to the war effort, took the path of resistance, as did Carlo Mierendorff, Julis Leber and many others”: They were certainly not concerned with defending a social hierarchy or, as the Gestapo tried to insinuate about Leuschner, with satisfying a personal ambition, but with fulfilling an obligation that they had assumed as elected representatives of the workers. Leuschner was undaunted throughout his resistance, and was very modest too. In a 1939 letter, he had written, “Tell our friends that we still are what we have always been… a hero without a uniform.” (Mommsen, 2003). It should, however, be noted that for years after the July 1944 plot, discourse on the German resistance against Hitler’s government seemed purely a West-German affair. For a long time in East Germany, Nazism had been viewed as “a capitalist conspiracy… leaving little room for the recognition that Jews were persecuted on so-called biological grounds” (Moses, 2004). “However, with the fall of the Berlin Wall and German reunification in 1990, resistance discourse now emphasizes a more integrative approach i.e. an all German opposition to Hitler is emphasized as a good thing whether, it was from the left or right of politics (Niven, 2002). In conclusion, having examined the prelude to the July 1944 plot, the true-blooded, humane characters involved and their drive to put an end to Hitler’s savagery, it leaves no doubt whatsoever in a cursory mind that these individuals acted in the interest of their fatherland. British historian, Ian Kershaw (2009), concludes: The July 1944 plot to kill Adolf Hitler was a desperate attempt by a group of senior officers to redeem Germanys honour and end the Second World War. They were heroic because they knew their chances of success were slight and that the result of their failure would undoubtedly be a terrible death. They wanted to leave a message for later generations: that there were Germans who understood the evils of Nazism and were willing to act against it. Works Cited Arendt, H. “Eichmann in Jerusalem: a Report on the Banality of Evil.” Penguin Group (USA) Inc., 2006. Collier, M. & Pedley, P. “Germany 1919 – 45 (Heinemann Advanced History).” Heinemann Educational Publishers, 2000. Fest, J. & Little, B. “Plotting Hitlers Death: The Story of German Resistance.” New York: Henry Holt & Company, Incorporated, 1997. Gisevius, H.B. “To the bitter end: an insiders account of the plot to kill Hitler, 1933-1944.” Cambridge: Da Capo Press, 1998. Hoffmann, P. “Stauffenberg: a family history, 1905-1944.” Quebec: McGill-Queens University Press, 2003. Hoffmann, P. “The history of the German resistance, 1933-1945.” Quebec: McGill-Queens University Press, 1996. Kennedy, W. “The Monarchist Plot To Kill Hitler.” http://greyfalcon.us/restored/stauffenburg.htm) Kershaw, I. “Hitler: 1936-45: Nemesis.” New York: Norton, W. W. & Company, Inc., 2000. Kershaw, I. “Luck of the Devil: The Story of Operation Valkyrie.” London: Penguin Books, 2009. Lane, R. “Loyalty and the Allies: Impediments to a Military Coup in Nazi Germany.” Canadian Forces College. Manvell, R. & Fraenkel, H. “The July Plot: The Attempt in 1944 on Hitler’s Life and the Men behind It.” London: The Bodley Head, 1964. McDonough, F. “Opposition and Resistance in Nazi Germany.” Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001. Mommsen, H. “Alternatives to Hitler: German resistance under the Third Reich.” London: I.B. Tauris & Co. Ltd, 2003. Moorhouse, R. “Killing Hitler: The Plots, the Assassins, and the Dictator Who Cheated Death.” New York: Bantam Books, 2007. Moses, A.D. “Review: Facing the Nazi Past: United Germany and the Legacy of the Third Reich.” Holocaust and Genocide Studies, 2004. Natteau, N. “The second coup attempt: the German Conspiracy to Destroy Hitler 1938 – 1944.” Niven, B. “Facing the Nazi Past: United Germany and the Legacy of the Third Reich.” London: Taylor & Francis Inc., 2002. Rothfels, H. “The German Opposition to Hitler.” Kirk Press, 2007. Shirer, W.L. “The rise and fall of the Third Reich: a history of Nazi Germany.” New York: Simon & Schuster Adult Publishing Group, 1990. Von Boselager, P.B., “Operation Valkyrie: The Definite Story” (DVD) Interview transcript. Anchor Bay Entertainment, 2009 Von Schlabrendorff, F. “The Secret War Against Hitler.” New York: Pitman Publishing Corp., 1965. “The Hitler Plot: 20 July 1944.” The Holocaust Educational Trust of Ireland. http://www.hetireland.org/uploads/file/Hitler%20plot.pdf “The Valkyrie Conspiracy: Resistance within Germany against Hilter and the Nazis.” http://valkyrie-plot.com/germanresistance.html Read More