Modernity in Nazi Germany under Hitler - Essay Example

Modernity in Nazi Germany under Hitler Until the end of the 19th century, the concept of bringing progress to the earth was European communities was linked to Christian ministers of missionaries and liberal or socialist humanitarians. They dwelled on instilling the native peoples in the colonies with European culture as well as raising the poverty-ridden people back at home with the principles of faith, liberty, or impartiality. However, in the years preceding the World War 1, racial ideologies gained prominence, which claimed that the educational labors of religious and secular-humanitarian representatives were ineffective. Instead, scientific discrimination showed a varied path to progression. This case was more pronounced in the Nazi Germany where academicians applied social Darwinist theories to dismiss the notion that the presumably lower races could be elevated1. This paper examines the ways in which Nazi Germany under Hitler was Pro Modernity as well as the ways in which it was against modernity and the resulting social impact that this had on the society. The question that mostly comes up in the discussion about modernity in Germany is whether the faith in a strange German antimodernism that attained its peak in National Socialism is how the Nazis could have attained political propaganda triumphs, financial recovery, the mobilization of the community 2and the brilliant military successes or indeed the terror and mass extermination that characterized the regime if they had rejected technological advancements. One strong answer to this question is what came to be known as reactionary modernism, which categorizes the reunion between the antimodernist, romantic, and irrationalist ideals as well as modern technology as unique to the radical right in both the Weimar Republic and the National Socialism led by Hitler3. In bringing together the political reaction with technological advancement the Nazi’s transformed the romantic anticapitalism of the right wing German far from the backward trend pastoralism, and pointed them instead to the confines of a magnificent new order. According to analysts, this conflicting amalgamation of reactionary political thoughts and a contemporary reliance on an influential reason and contemporary means made Nazism feasible4. Apart from the area of reactionary modernism, another area where the Nazi party tried to bring modernity was in the area of science. In his opinion, scientist Rudolf Cronau claimed that there was no doubt that there was an existing inequality in the community in as far as races was concerned. Cronau claimed that under equally favorable environmental and land situations, the higher race always dislodged the lower. This meant that any contact with the culture of the higher race was lethal poison for the lower race and this obviously killed them. Given this explanation, Cronau along with other social thinkers and academicians of his day who conformed to the Darwinian social rationalizations and eugenics in the end of the 19th century and the early years of the 20th century therefore argued that the key to destruction was the destruction of the lesser races who blocked the way of advanced culture and modernity5. Some social Darwinist philosophers went further, arguing that racial annihilation, even if conducted in a bloody manner, would give way to moral progress for humanity. Violence would not necessarily succeed in the fight for existence, because, as Darwin had claimed in the Descent of Man, morality presented a selective advantage. For this reason, according to this warped reasoning, since Europeans were ethically higher to other races, the execution of the other races would free the world of immorality. Given that the views given on racial extermination are so unreasonable, it is therefore not surprising to note that so many scholars have chosen to distance such extermination racism from modernity. They are without a doubt right in that the philosophy of cultural extermination destabilized cosmopolitan classlessness and humanitarianism, which is extensively seen as the essence of modernity. However, social Darwinism, on which exterminationist racism depended, was the peak of modernity in other ways. To begin with, social Darwinists constantly enticed to scientific laws and evolutionary progress in order to do away with customary ideas and structures that seemed to prevent thorough modernization from taking place. They also advocated for radical secularization, which is often seen as closely related to modernity. The promise of extreme science that positivist science, including Darwinism, seemed to offer for the emancipation and advancement of humankind strongly appealed to many leftists. Even pacifism was usually closely connected with eugenics since it presented a total departure from the flawed man of the past. Regardless of how modernity is defined today, it is clear that Hitler and his Nazi Germany saw themselves and their racial theories as balanced, progressive and modern6. Although the links of social Darwinism and eugenics to radical social reform in German thought have been studied extensively in the past, it is surprising that very little attention has been accorded to the appeal of a certain type of racialist thought, exterminationist racism. Ideally, racism does not always denote extermination, but usually functions as a validation for slavery or financial repression. Some German colonial rulers and even doctors claimed that German policy should focus in augmenting the aboriginal African populations, so they could utilize more labor. What this implies is that the Nazi party was committed to modernizing the society and they knew that the best way to achieve this objective was through extermination7. Although the Nazi regime is usually depicted in bad light, it is apparent that the party led by Hitler tried to modernize the society to ensure that it matched the rest of the world in terms of development. Perhaps this explains why the regime had great backing from the German people. Apart from ensuring that the German nation was only comprised of superior races and hence the desire to exterminate the inferior races, the country had a modern police force that has been used as models in subsequent times. Over the years, some historians have claimed that the Germans contributed to the Holocaust enthusiastically by being driven by a rather distinctive eliminationist anti-Semitism. However, the bulk of the evidence has shown that the motives for bringing change were mostly driven by ideology8. One thing that comes out clearly wherever studies on the Nazi are undertaken is the effectiveness of the Gestapo in handling crime as well as ensuring that order prevailed in the nation. In order to ensure that the police were effective, the Nazi party ensured that their police were motivated; this can be seen from the fact that the Nazis celebrated the police in festivities that lasted for weeks all over the country. Motivated by such recognition, the Gestapo registered much success in the war on crime, immorality and pornography. The police were backed by a strong judicial system that gave harsh punishments and utilized the death penalty on a scale that has not been seen before. The praise that these two departments got from the day’s press greatly increased their effectiveness. Although the police finally moved from enforcing the law to9 becoming overly brutally, it is clear that they at first managed to bring a sense of order in the society. Creating social order was one of Hitler’s objectives when he ascended to power and it is apparent that he obtained this objective albeit using the wrong channels. Another area that the Nazi party tried to bring modernity was in the area of the environment. Through the years, Germany had understood the value of the environment as a crucial component of the society and as such this nation focused on preserving it. Ideally, the Socialist Party believed that the ecology was superior to man and as such they were strongly against the interference of nature in any way. In his own words, Hitler claimed that wherever people try to go against the iron logic of nature, they come face to face with the same principles to which they peg their existence as human beings. In this way, he felt that their actions against nature resulted in their downfall and ultimate destruction. In order to ensure that the whole society was sensitive to the protection of the environment, the biologists tasked with developing the curriculum designed a system where young people were supposed to be educated on matters environmental from a young age in order to ensure that they actively participated in conserving the environment later on life10. While racism, which is one of the central elements of National Socialism, had no role in earlier attempts at modernity, there is undoubtedly a widespread resemblance in their radical nationalism, militarism, and anti-liberal totalitarianism. Although the Nazi media tried as much as possible to discredit all the earlier attempts at modernity, the truth is that all the existing modernity during the Hitler regime was started just after the First World War. However, it is also apparent that technological advancement was more concentrated during the Hitler reign. Actually, Hitler called himself a techno-enthusiast and this can be demonstrated in his level of investment in technology. Actually, the Gestapo, which was the Nazi police, saw technology as a very potent weapon in the struggle for life. This can be seen from the skilled surveillance systems that they employed in their attempt to restore order and morality in the society11. The fact that the Nazi regime supported modernism can be seen from the numerous literatures written during this period extolling the virtues of technology. While the Nazi regime attacked the banking system and the insistence of profits as an expression of supposedly Jewish materialism and ravenousness, it extolled the potential of contemporary technology and the works of entrepreneurs who had given birth to entrepreneurship. The National Socialists were conscious enough in their acceptance of technology since they saw it as the foundation of the nation, of a high standard of morality and of military power. With a matching strong belief in the positive task of modern technology in a fast transforming society, the founding fathers of the National Socialist held the belief that the Third Reich could produce an overflow of cheap priced electricity that would aid small organizations and farmers and thus bring about decentralization of modern society. Through the many public speeches, the National Socialism reinforced and strengthened its positive attitude towards modernism. With their popular slogan, “Hitler above Germany” National Socialism called to attention Hitler’s use of an airplane.12 Hitler also wanted to create the image that he was the father of the motorway system and this led him to promote the use of cars all over the country both for the masses and the military. This widespread use of cars saw numerous plants dedicated to the manufacture of cars something that has continued to the modern day13. Ant modernism in Nazi Germany and its Effects on Society Although the National Socialism was fully committed towards modernism, there are other various areas where they were antimodern. One of these areas was the Nazi policy towards agriculture. In a large part, the rural population that relied heavily on agriculture for survival remained antiquated since the Nazi regime did not attach much importance to this great sector. This was a sign of antimodernity since the regime did not believe that the rural folk had any meaningful contribution to make in the modern society. Another sign of antimodernism was in the popular belief among National Socialism that extremely gifted people with strong willpower could beat all the odds and transform technology in to a submissive servant. For this reason, the socialists never saw the need for them to speak the language of technology and conform to its essentials and neither did it note the dialectical association between utilizing technology and conforming to a technological way of life. In their belief that technology would indeed be a great tool in their possession, the National Socialists did not demonstrate any consciousness of the authority of technology over those who used it. Their immature confidence was immune to the disorienting experiences of the First World War and the resultant economic crises, because they had several scapegoats to blame for all such negative outcomes14. On a more realistic level, Nazi policy never sought for consistency and the enveloping planning ideal to attain a technocratic society. Although there are some technocratic behaviors, the issues that are widely visible are the numerous compromises with various social groupings and great numbers of contending individuals and institutional bodies. Society was in no way required to operate like a machine, but rather according to the social principles set by Darwin, that is according to which the strongest would survive. This principle in essence enhanced, and it led to the weakening of the effectiveness of the Nazi system. The progressive improvisation instead of laying down long-term strategies, the absence of apparent practical structures and areas of duties, the suppression of long-term plans by the National Socialist luminaries, the short term use of raw materials, the absence of direction of competence through a fully operational monetary system, the demolition of existing social relationships and open transfer of information, all demonstrate an absence of comprehension of how the modern industry and technology is supposed to operate. Hitler’s depended on the creative power and capability of ordinary individuals and his own while he made constant orders to the army personnel to request the industry for new or superior weapons15. He demonstrated a lack of comprehension for the necessity of harmonized and methodical research as well as of the sense of technical improvements and modernizations, and this led to the apparent fall in patents and innovations in the country16. The National Socialist cultural policy if analyzed carefully also showed signs of antimodernism. While the modernists on every side of the political divide called for the modernization of all cultural forms in the manner of abandoning all unwanted decorations, the National Socialism responded to this to these calls something that depicted an emotional compensation instead of matching reality and form. In the following years following these unpopular demands, most German cities were stripped of their traditional beauty in favor of modern armaments such as swimming pools. As a result of this, this apparent break of the past created a scenario where the traditional form of art paved the way to modernity. This definitely had a negative effect as the society forgot its traditional values of humanity towards their neighbors. This explains why the entire population was united in its attempt towards ridding the society of the Jews and those who were considered to belong to the lower class17. The failure at modernization had also meant that the country’s economic system could not support itself. Since the country needed labor for its expansive manufacturing industry, this created the need for laborers who could offer free labor and hence the need for the concentration camps. Although German had a strong media during the modernization period, the failure at modernization saw this same media being transformed into media organs to transmit propaganda to the society and to the world at large. In the early years of the Nazi rule, Hitler had ensured that the youth were educated in the Darwinian principles. Once the ideals of this ideology were inculcated into the minds of these young people, it became easy to instill the changes in the society since the young people who were the majority backed these changes18. Conclusion The issue of whether Germany under Hitler was pro modern or against modernism has divided historians down the middle. On one side, there are those who agree that Germany under Hitler completely adopted technology while the other group holds that Germany was completely against modernity during this period. However, a thorough examination shows that Germany had totally adopted modernity19 during this period with the National Socialist leader, Hitler, being on the forefront in advocating modernism. In the numerous literature produced during this period, Hitler is depicted as someone who was completely pro modernity. Despite this totalitarian adoption of modernity, there were still some areas where the country held on to outdated beliefs something that led to the suffering of the nation. One of these areas was in Agriculture where the rural dwellers who completely relied on agriculture were seen as not crucial in building the new nation. Bibliography Bendersky, Joseph. A Concise History of Nazi Germany: 1919–1945. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2005.  Brüggemeier, Franz-Josef; Cioc, Mark; Zeller, Thomas. How Green Were the Nazis? Nature, Environment, and Nation in the Third Reich. Athens: Ohio University Press, 2005. Herf, Jeffrey. Reactionary Modernism: Technology, Culture, and Politics in Weimar and the Third Reich Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985. Nicholas, Lynn. Cruel World: The Children of Europe in the Nazi Web. New York: Vintage, 2006. Paxton, Robert. The Anatomy of Fascism. Vintage Books, 2005. Price, Alfred. Targeting the Reich: Allied Photographic Reconnaissance over Europe, 1939–1945. London: Military Book Club, 2003. Steiner, Zara. The Triumph of the Dark: European International History 1933–1939. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press, 2011. Tooze, Adam. The Wages of Destruction: The Making and Breaking of the Nazi Economy. London; New York: Allen Lane, 2006. Umbreit, Hans. Germany and the Second World War: Organization and Mobilization in the German Sphere of Power. Part 2: Wartime Administration, Economy, and Manpower Resources, 1942-1944/5. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press, 2008. Weale, Adrian. Army of Evil: A History of the SS. New York; Toronto: Penguin Group, 2010.  Zeitlin, Jonathan. Flexibility and Mass Production at War: Aircraft Manufacture in Britain, the United States, and Germany, 1939–1945. Technology and Culture 36 (1), 2012: 46–79. Read More