* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download Propaganda and Terror
Survey
Document related concepts
Luxembourgish collaboration with Nazi Germany wikipedia , lookup
Causes of World War II wikipedia , lookup
Art and World War II wikipedia , lookup
Swingjugend wikipedia , lookup
Nazi plunder wikipedia , lookup
Catholic bishops in Nazi Germany wikipedia , lookup
New Order (Nazism) wikipedia , lookup
Propaganda in the Soviet Union wikipedia , lookup
Economy of Nazi Germany wikipedia , lookup
Pursuit of Nazi collaborators wikipedia , lookup
Nazi Germany wikipedia , lookup
World War II and American animation wikipedia , lookup
British propaganda during World War II wikipedia , lookup
Nazi views on Catholicism wikipedia , lookup
Transcript
Propaganda and Terror The Nazis maintained the basic institutional structure of the Weimar Republic while adding a nazified layer. This was the case with the policy of indoctrination and propaganda. PROPAGANDA The Ministry of Education was fully centralised. This was part of a campaign to destroy the autonomy of the Lander in 1933. Schools were to have a common Nazi curriculum. New subjects were introduced which used reflected Nazi ideology. The Ministry of People’s Enlightenment and Propaganda was a new institution established in March 1933. This was presided over by Goebbels. It controlled all areas of propaganda through film, radio, and the press and influenced cultural output in the form of literature, music and the fine arts. The Law on the Hitler Youth in 1936 confirmed the existence of the group which had been around since the start of the Third Reich. TERROR Coercion or even terror was the other side of the coin. This was the responsibility of the SS/Gestapo/SD complex. The Schutzstaffeln (Security Squads SS) formed in 1925 merged with the SD and the Gestapo to assume complete responsibility for security and political policing. They implemented Hitler’s racial policies and after 1941 became the instrument of genocide. Goebbels and Himmler took control of this, although their methods differed. Goebbels operated within the regular institutions of the Nazi sate, while Himmler created a new system. How effective were Indocrination and Propaganda? “It is not enough for people to be more or less reconciled to our regime, to be persuaded to adopt a neutral attitude towards us: rather we want to work on people until they have capitulated to us, until they grasp ideologically that what is happening in Germany today not only must be accepted but also can be accepted” (Goebbels at a press conference at opening of Ministry of People’s Enlightenment and Propaganda March 15 1933) He also wanted to use the latest technology in order to achieve maximum saturation. This was done in through two changes: 1. Increase in the power of the existing Ministry of Education. This was fully centralised taking power from the Lander. 2. Setting up of the Ministry for People’s Enlightenment and Propaganda. It was to be all embracing with a series of chambers, relating to press, radio, theatre, music, creative arts and film. In theory it had the power to apply negative censorship in whatever form it saw as necessary and to shape the development of culture at all levels. Propaganda: Channels like radio, cinema and press. Indoctrination: Education and youth movements, the work place and the armed forces. Youth: Education: Indoctrination was at its most effective with the Youth movements. Schools had a radicalisation of the curriculum introducing race study, eugenics and health biology, all as vehicles to impart Nazi ideology. Conventional subjects like History and Maths were given a twist. 22 of 76 pages of official Maths textbook had ideological references eg. Calculations of the cost to produce lunatic asylums as opposed to workers’ housing. Girls and boys were to be prepared separately for obviously stereotyped roles. The teaching profession was carefully organised, the Nazi Teachers’ League (NSLB) made up 97% of the total teaching force by 1937. Flaws in the process: There was the overlapping between administrative and party organs. Eg: the Ministry of Education continued to use the Weimar Republic guidelines as it disagreed with the party about how they should be changed. The conflict between Ley and Rust and Bormann and Hess delayed the new regulations for elementary education until 1939. Secondary schools had equally similar problems. The content of the curriculum was diluted by more traditional influences. Confusion persisted as to how to deliver the curriculum. Gestapo reports contain numerous examples of unsatisfactory teachers who were probably just confused. Indoctrination in education was in theory to be complemented by the mobilisation of the youth movements. Youth Movements Specialised activities (for age and gender) were provided through the German Young People (DJ), Hitler Youth (HJ), Young Maidens (JM) and League of German Maidens (BDM). These held widespread appeal for young people as they appeared at first to challenge more conservative forms of authority and gave youth a sense of collective power. The Flaws Again there were disputes. The Ministry of Education and Reich Youth Leadership argued over underlying objectives and priorities. They often diverged. The youth groups encouraged physical prowess over intellectual ability. The Youth movements lost their appeal as they were seen to be simply enforcing the ideas of the new establishment. The Hitler Youth became simply a nursery for military mobilisation. The best of the youth leaders moved into the army and the official youth programme became more routine and less imaginative. Peukert claims “the ideological content of National Socialism remained too vague to function as a self-sufficient educational objective. In practice young people selected from competing informationsources and values which were on offer”. With war, Youth movements lost all their positive aspects but did become more influential. Nazi Germany created a modern youth culture which was autonomous and sometimes hostile to it. Propaganda to population Radios Nazis gave priority to radio as this increased the personal contact between people and their leader. By 1939 70 % people owned radios (compared with 25% in 1932). More than anywhere else in the world. The radio provided the most abiding impression of the fuhrer they were likely to have. Film Film was more difficult. It was less successful than radio. Riefenstahl’s Triumph of the Will was commissioned by Hitler as a record of the Nuremberg rallies of 1934. It fostered the Fuhrer cult. However, it was too long for most audiences who disliked the repetition of the same type of scene. Hitler was less able to produce a film to capture the public’s imagination than Goebbels. The Eternal Jew commissioned by Hitler and directed by Hippler was so crude that audiences were repelled by its images. Goebbels was more successful with his anti-semitic film ‘Jew Suss’. He had, by this time learned how to introduce propaganda as a subliminal message within the context of a story with which the viewers could identify. Press Using the press for propaganda was difficult. It was based on a more traditional technology. It had had longer than radio to develop under private ownership. Radio, by contrast could be taken over fairly easily by the state. Newspapers were produced in huge numbers during the liberal years of the Weimar Republic. By 1933 there were over 4,700 daily newspapers in Germany, representing a wide variety of political and regional views and loyalties. To an extent, the regime gained effective administrative control. 1933-45 the number of State-owned papers increased from 2.5% to 82% of the total. The German News Agency (DNB) controlled the means whereby the news was to be presented. News agencies were amalgamated to ensure a single source of information. Journalists were responsible to the state not their editors. Goebbels met with the newspaper bosses every day to discuss their front pages and news stories. The result was a bland form of journalism and writing. This led to a decline in public interest. The emphasis on censorship was preventative not creative. Culture Nazis distrusted the traditional content of culture but never really was able to suggest an alternative. In Literature, art and music, censorship created a contemporary vacuum which was supposed to be filled with a Nazi culture. Literature produced a complete void. Music was less affected. Art was the most filled but with work a distressingly low quality. In literature there was much censorship. Massive book burning by the SA led to the removal of 2,500 German authors from the approved lists. It was never really going to lead to an alternative Nazi literature since Nazism itself was anti-intellectual. Visual arts were used to put across basic blood and soil values. Painters like Kampf and Ziegler were able to provide pictorial stereotypes eg: women as home makers and men in a military role. This reinforced the gender roles as introduced by the youth movements such as BDM and JH. The result was a bland form of art which lacked talent. The vacuum left by censorship was filled with mediocrity. ‘Nazi’ art tended to copy other forms of art and lacked originality. Eg: Kamp’s study of Venus and Adonis was a copy of earlier masters like Rubens and David. There was always more interest in non-Nazi art (which was seen as ‘degenerate’ by the Nazis). Music The Nazi regime ended the period of musical expereimentation which had been a major cultural aspect of the Weimar Republic. The works of Shoenberg and Berg were considered un-German and those of Mendelssohn were banned as ‘Jewish’. The majority of German or Austrian composers were unaffected. The Nazis used certain composers to spread Nazi values. Hitler liked Wagner and saw his ‘Ring Cycle’ as the musical embodiment of volkisch values. Some composers like Richard Strauss and Carl Orff had an ambivalent attitude to the Nazi regime (neither against or in favour of it). They managed to exist alongside the regime. Therefore the musical output of the Third Reich was superior to the art. However, it was not necessary distinctively Nazi. Nazi culture did not have a lasting impact on culture (unlike Socialist Realism in Russia). Success of Propaganda The big test was would people accept the war? Propaganda worked to put across the Nazi ideology. However, there was a need to be pragmatic, particularly to meet the needs of war. 1933-9 - pragmatism frequently diluted ideology. This meant that Hitler’s ideas were theoretically very inconsistent. He was presented as a man of peace while emphasising struggle and war-like values. 1939-43 – Stage One: Getting people used to the idea of war. Emphasis was made on ‘Blitzkrieg’. This fitted in with the notion of easy conquest achieved by the ‘master race’. This was a considerable success. Hitler reached the peak of his success in 1940 with the fall of France. 1943-45 – Stage Two: Getting people used to the experience of war. 1943 Goebbels ‘Total War’ speech was a success. Propaganda became less successful. People showed fortitude in the face of adversity and destruction, not a fanatical desire to achieve a world vision. By this stage Nazi propaganda had become irrelevant.