Hitler Within You | |
|---|---|
| Author | Ulrike Meinhof |
| Publisher | konkret |
| First published | 1961 |
| Type | Article |
The attempt to turn twelve years of German history into a taboo subject has failed. From Heusinger to Foertsch, from Oberländer to Globke, from Heyde/Sawada to Eichmann we have seen that you can live in the Germany of 1961, regardless of Stalingrad and Oradour, regardless of Auschwitz and Buchenwald.
The narrowing gap between the fronts of history and politics, between the accusers, the accused, and the victims haunts the younger generation. This generation was not involved in the crimes of the Third Reich or in determining the direction that was taken in the postwar period; it has grown up with and into the arguments of the present, entangled in the blame for something it is not responsible for. The realization that this generation is innocent cannot, however, be used as an instrument by those who want to refuse young people the right to have their say about history; nor does it free this generation from facing the responsibilities of the present.
Students are especially important in this regard. More than any other sector of the population, they have access to sources of information and facts, and in a few years they themselves will be playing important roles in universities and schools and government, carrying out what they are demanding today.
On the occasion of the Eichmann trial, Dieter Bielenstein, the media spokesman for the Association of German Student Organizations published a text that seeks to speak for this younger generation, a text we consider inadequate but remarkable enough to cite it here in its entirety, with added comments:
The trial of Adolf Eichmann once again brings the injustices of our history into full focus. If we understand this correctly, we will not be able to say that only others were the murderers, and that we merely suffered their actions. The older people will have to remember that the Nazi posters “Juda! Die!” used to hang in public view, and that they continued to vote for Hitler. Then, overnight or at dawn, Jewish neighbors and friends disappeared—and we were silent. Too cowardly to ask where they had gone, or maybe because we approved. Even though the Eichmann trial is being held in Jerusalem, we feel it among us. We are all concerned, and some people—including those of social standing and renown—may be named as guilty of or at least complicit in the crimes. We will have to condemn them, even if they wanted to control the crimes or alleviate the suffering. Some who were responsible for crimes of the past may well see themselves as exonerated because within the evil, they sought better alternatives. Regardless, they should be forever excluded from all high positions or public recognition, because in this democracy of ours, any participation in the crimes of the National Socialists has the effect of poison, the effect of justifying the actions of those who remain incorrigible, and who are once again making themselves heard.
The students of the Weimar Republic were militant in their anti-Semitism, even before the National Socialists entered the arena. In 1926, the German Student Body decided by secret ballot to include “racial features” as a criterion for membership, and excluded Jewish students as a result. The orgies of hatred that culminated in book burnings after the Nazis “seized power” were largely carried out by students. And then they demanded that Jewish academics should no longer be allowed to publish in German, but should be forced to use Hebrew or some other foreign language. Soon after, Jewish academics were removed from their jobs, and the students applauded or remained silent. Thomas Mann’s honorary doctorate was revoked by the university in Bonn; the brown shirts ruled the field. We cannot ignore that this anti-Semitic attitude, this hatred and slander began in 1920, and that from that point onward the traditional student fraternities, especially those in the Germanic University Circle, fostered and promoted this demon.
Today, the students of those years are our professors, lawyers, teachers, journalists, and administrators. They are the old gentlemen in our fraternities, and they are our parents. This is not meant as a blanket accusation or a call to report on the past of any one individual. But it does point to the fact that we cannot remain silent on this topic, that as students we must take up a position and not allow the past to rest, and that we must demand answers from the older generation.
If the silence at universities means that the demon remains intact, and if statements are made that display incorrigibility, then we shall not hesitate to proclaim that there is no room at our universities for professors or student associations that do not draw conclusions from the German catastrophe. In November 1957 and October 1959, the Association of German Student Organizations set up German-Israeli talks that explored how knowledge of Jewish history is created and transmitted in various areas of education and publishing. In June 1960 the association organized an educational conference on the theme of “Pedagogy and Judaism”; it published a book with the same title shortly afterward. For the past three years dozens of young German students have been traveling to Israel every summer to work on kibbutzim. Ten of our universities have German-Israeli study groups, which many of the 130 Israeli students presently in Germany belong to. The chairman of the Israeli student association took up an invitation from Bonn last year. All these developments do not, however, allow our younger generation to define a “new beginning.” We cannot and must not erase the memory of the recent decades of our history. We must use this history to find a new and a better way into the future for our people.
I have not enumerated these activities as an alibi. It is troubling enough that the Union of National Students—which is now prohibited—displayed radical rightwing and anti-Semitic tendencies. A number of other student associations are also close-mouthed about their position during the Weimar Republic, although they have every reason to make public statements. Our universities still do not have a single institute for research on Judaism and Jewish history. University lectures and school textbooks still leave much to be desired in this area.
And so it is the task of the student body to be watchful and to admonish our academics, ensuring that they learn to fulfill their political duties in society.
So far so good.
Bielenstein restricts his comments to criticism of the so-called “old Nazis” and the efforts made by the German student associations to establish good relations with the state of Israel. Anyone who speaks of “old Nazis,” however, should also take the next step, which is to recognize and criticize the equally old political ideas that still hold sway. Anyone who castigates anti-Semitism must also speak up for freedom wherever it is being threatened today. Anti-Semitism cannot be countered by a few student excursions to Israel; pro-Semitism is only half a response. The only possible response to anti-Semitism is the rejection of every kind of political terror that administrative powers can impose on those who think differently, those who believe differently, and those who feel differently. The response to concentration camps is not just to close them down, but to guarantee total political freedom for political opponents. The response to the invasion of Poland does not lie in refusing diplomatic relations with Warsaw; the attack on the Soviet Union cannot be made good by the appointment of someone like Herr Foertsch, nor can the invasion of France be expunged by the Bundeswehr holding maneuvers in Mourmelon; the banning of the German Association of Unions is not resolved by Emergency Laws; police actions against black students in 1961 are not a response to the exclusion of Jewish students from German universities in 1933.
Anti-fascist sandbox games cannot make up for the (lack of) resistance against National Socialism—not for the younger generation or the older generation. The response to National Socialism must be found in internal and external policies, for today and tomorrow. It means freedom for political opponents, the separation of powers, and the sovereignty of the people. It means reconciliation with former opponents, co-existence rather than war, negotiation rather than rearmament.
One day we will be asked about Herr Strauss in the same way we now ask our parents about Hitler.