Kristallnacht as the Turning-Point in the Development of Nazi Policies towards the Jews - Research Paper Example

To What Extent Should ‘Kristallnacht’ (9-10 November 1938) Be Seen As The Turning-Point In The Development Of Nazi Policies Towards The Jews? The question of the Nazi policies towards the Jews in general, and in regard to “Kristallnacht” has dominated historical works for decades as historians seeks to find out the true position behind the issue and discard assumptions and uninformed arguments about it. The whole issue revolves around the ideology of Nazism. This ideology was based on assumption that the Aryan race was the most supreme over all other races in the world and that the humanity progress was greatly dependent on the Aryan people. Therefore, they believed that they should maintain their dominance through retaining of the Aryan self- preservation and purity (Bendersky 40). According to their view, the Jews were Aryan’s race greatest threat. Their view was informed by their consideration of the Jews as parasitic race who secured their self- preservation by attaching themselves to several movements and ideologies including parliamentary democracy, industrialization, capitalism, trade unionism, and liberalism among others (Kaplan 65). As a result of that view, the Nazis believed that their self-preservation, strength, and purity can only be maintained by exterminating the Jews. It should be noted that even though extermination of the Jews was Nazi’s top priority, they also targeted the homosexuals, mentally and physically disabled, political opponents, and members of Jehovah Witness for exclusionary treatment. In order to achieve its intention, Nazism encouraged and indeed promoted war, militarism, and political violence and used the Sturmabteilung, its paramilitary organization to attack political opponents, and the Jews (Noakes and Pridham 33). Throughout the existence of Nazism, racial policy was considered as one of the main policies of the government; the Nazis viewed race in terms of hierarchy and held the belief that inequality of races existed and that the Aryan race had the higher values and were the most superior in the world (Bendersky 52). It is against the background of Nazism and racial policy that historians link their arguments in regard to “Kristallnacht” and the development of Nazi policies [towards the Jews. This paper will seek to understand the extent to which “Kristallnacht” (9-10 November 1938) can be seen as the turning- point in the development of Nazi policies towards the Jews. In discussing this topic, the paper will examine different views from historians; was “Kristallnacht” the turning- point in the history of Holocaust? Or did the history of Holocaust begin earlier, with events in the late 1937 or the first part of 1938 marking a watershed? Or could the actual turning point was in wartime and not in 1938? All these views have some basis and none of them can be dismissed or be claimed without substantial evidence (Noakes and Pridham 46). Definitely, there has to be a reason why the Nazi Germany killed over 6 million Jews. In this paper, these three main views are discussed from the “Kristallnacht” (9-10 November 1938) point of view. So, in order to understand the pogrom of 9/10 November 1938, it will be necessary to place it in the context of events earlier that year. From the late 1937, there were signs that the Nazi regime was about to become more radical both to the Jews and in its foreign policy as well. It should be noted that the behavior of the Nazi regime in the late 1937 was preceded by its overall racial and Jewish policy from 1933 which consisted two main elements: racial segregation and eugenics. In regard to the racial segregation, the Nazis intended to keep the race of Arya closed from other races that they considered inferior. Likewise, the eugenics element was aimed at keeping the Aryan race away from illnesses and abnormalities. The policy of racial segregation was initiated and it sought to persecute and suppress the non- Aryans, particularly all the Jews. As a result of the policy, the Jews were forced to emigrate. In April 1933, the Nazis had already enacted anti- Jewish legislations. In the following years of 934 and 1935, there were more anti- Jewish laws, legislation and decrees that the Nazis were enacting that formed a clear sign that, indeed they were against the Jewish and they were up to something more tragic (Friedlander 83). Friedlander argues that from the late 1937, there were signs that the Nazi regime was about to become more radical both to the Jews and in its foreign policy as well. He notes that during this period, the new anti- Jewish laws were being implemented and that the real segregation of Jews from the Aryans was being witnessed. As a matter of fact, the Jews were facing financial segregation because of the status of their race. The execution of Helmut Hirsch, a young German Jew on 1937, June 4, was a clear indication that indeed the Nazis policy was getting more radical towards the Jews (Friedlander 84). Schleunes concurs with Friedlander’s view that there were signs in the late 1937 of Nazi regime becoming more radical; the regime had upped their legislative persecution of the Jews as evidenced by “Aryanization” of Jewish businesses (Schleunes 49). More signs included revocation of Jewish lawyers’ licenses to practice law and the Jewish doctors being forbidden to treat Aryans. As a result of anti- Jewish legislation, the balance of power within was immensely skewed in favor of the Nazis at the expense of non- Aryans, particularly the Jewish. Besides, there was change in the balance of power between the Nazis and traditional conservatives, though the change was minimal as most of the traditional conservatives were not opposed to the Nazis’ policies towards the Jewish and in foreign sphere as well (Kaplan 33). Between September 1937 and March 1938, the Nazi policy showed more signs of radicalization. Between these periods, it was the Nazi government policy hat the Jews should identify themselves in manner that can permanently and clearly separate them from the Aryans. At this time, they had been totally removed from participating in the economy of Germany (Noakes and Pridham 60). Friedlander observes that in January, 1938 there were laws that were in being implemented regarding changing certain names, as well as family names. He notes that the purpose of these laws was to make it harder for the Jews to run away from the persecution through changing of their names (Friedlander 86). More signs of radicalization were evident in March, 1938 when the Jewish businesses could no longer be awarded government contracts. The position of the Jews was further affected in March 1938 when the Nazi government took over Australia in what is famously known as the Nazi Anschluss. As a result of Nazi Anschluss, Nazis started cracking down on the Austrian Jews; they humiliated and arrested them in public. This meant that Hitler had succeeded in his efforts of starting to unite all German- speaking people and in executing his plans against the Jews. Longerich argues that Nazi Anschluss gave the Nazi regime the momentum to “deal” with the Jewish in the German State (Longerich 73). He argues that the desire to unite all German- speaking people and exterminating Jewish had began in Austria and it was just a matter of time before the plan was executed in large- scale. As such, it can be argued that, to a greater extent, Nazi Anschluss set in motion the series that led to Kristallnatch that eventually marked the turning point in the development of Nazi policies towards the Jews, later on in November. Even though most if not all of the Nazis believed that the Jewish should be exterminated, the “Jewish question” in general was faced with great competition within the Nazi Party. There were signs of greater competition within the party for influence over the question. The bureaucratic structure of the Nazi government that derived its members from the Nazi Party was often marked with overlapping responsibilities and competition. The party had two major factions: radical and conservative. The conservatives such as Heinrich Himmler and Hermann Goring urged Hitler to make conciliation with reactionaries and capitalists. Conversely, the radicals did not want anything to do with capitalism which they believed was at the core of Jews (Noakes and Pridham 51-52). The radicals such as Otto Strasser left the party because they believed that Hitler had endorsed capitalism hence betraying the objectives of the party which were socialist. Majority f the members of the party supported the socialist ideology and [the positions that were revolutionary and anti- capitalist. Hitler took a middle position that allowed socialist policies but at the same time allowed capitalists to exist under condition that they obey the Nazi regime’s goals. It should be noted that, regardless of signs of greater competition within the party, there was agreement among them that the Jews were to be exterminated. Although the conservatives had a more lenient approach to the process which the radicals (who were the majority) felt may jeopardize the immediate extermination of the process (Friedlander 90). Kristallnacht which is also known as the Night of Broken Glass is one of the main events in the German history that occurred in 9- 10 November 1938. The event was characterized by coordinated attacks in the Nazi Germany and certain parts of Austria against the Jews. The attacks were carried out by both the German civilians (Aryans) and the SA Stormtroopers (Schleunes 64). As a result, it is reported that more than 91 Jews were killed, and more than 30,000 of them arrested and jailed in concentration camps. Besides, schools, hospitals, and homes belonging to the Jews were ransacked and buildings demolished. It is agreeable among historians that this act of violence was initiated and fuelled by the top hierarchy of the Nazi Party. Fisher traces the immediate cause of the pogrom from the killing of Ernst von Rath who was a junior diplomat in Paris on November 7, 1938 (Fisher 101). Gilbert argues that the Nazi regime had been for a considerable period of time contemplating coordinated attacks against the Jews and was simply waiting for a provocation. He cites the evidence of the Nazis to seize Jewish businesses and property (Gilbert 48). This argument is further enforced by what the Zionist leadership wrote in 1938, February saying that reliable source that can be traced to the Nazi Party’ top echelon indicate that there is an intention by the Nazi regime to carry out a large- scale attacks against the Jews in period around 1938. Therefore, the shooting of vom Rath by the Polish Jew, Herschel Grynszpan in Paris on November 7, 1938, that became sufficient provocation for the attacks to be implemented (Evans 57). What followed was the German government announcing the initial punitive measure because of the shooting; Jewish magazines and newspapers were to immediately stop publication. They were also cut off from the German leadership with the intention of disrupting the Jewish community and cutting existing ties that may be between them and the German Nazis (Fisher 39). Also, Jewish students were denied attending German elementary schools and their cultural activities were indefinitely suspended and their citizen’s rights stripped. The death of vom Rath on November 9 prompted Hitler’s government issued a speech stating that demonstrations will not be prepared by the party but if they erupt spontaneously the government will not intervene (Pehle 26). When the riots erupted the regime made no effort to control or intervene. Berenbaum explains that the Kristallnacht did not occur as a surprise Nazis and it was just a culmination of preceding processes against the Jews (Berenbaum 40). Indeed, the Nazis were psychologically “primed for action” on 9 November. Since the appointment of Hitler as the leader of Nazi group, the regime became awash with anti- Jewish sentiments and policies. The Nazis were being prepared psychologically as they were made to believe that their self- preservation and purity was being threatened by the Jewish, and can only be maintained if they are exterminated (Schleunes 55). Around that time the Jewish accounted for less than 1% of the German’s overall population. The main reason why the Nazis were psychologically “primed for action” was that the Nazi propaganda had singled out them as their enemy who led to the defeat of Germany in the First World War (Berenbaum 53). Also, they attributed the economic difficulties of Germany after the First World War to the Jews. These reasons made the Nazis to believe that the Jews were indeed their enemies and a threat to their very existence. This made them to be psychologically “primed for action” against the Jews anytime and November 9 presented a good opportunity for that (Kaplan 78). There has been a raging among historians on whether the pogrom was centrally directed and to what extent was the directing. There is an agreement among them that the orders to arrest the Jews came from Hitler, directly. Evans argues that throughout the Reich, the orders were given through SA, SS, and local party that synagogues should be destroyed and burned down but should not be looted (Evans 53). That notwithstanding, Evans says that there is no direct evidence that shows that the pogrom was centrally directed. However, although there were no central orders passed down regarding the pogrom, there was sufficient unspoken consensus among the Nazis that justified the pogrom. Loewenberg concurs with this assertion by stating that the consensus was as a result of not just the Nazi Party’s motives, but also Nazis’ personal motives such as greed, long- held grudges, and economic resentment (Loewenberg 310-11). These motives were caused and reinforced by ideological beliefs that believed in purity and self- preservation of the Nazis. The 9-10 November pogrom varied from units to units but with similar objectives. The Nazis who participated in the pogrom were armed with axes and sledgehammers and were destroying and burning property that belonged to the Jewish. Also, Jews men who were seen as being young and healthy were arrested and jailed in the local jails. It is estimated that nearly 7500 Jewish businesses and stores were destroyed (Pehle 28). There were instances where the Jews were either assaulted or beaten. Over 30,000 Jewish men were estimated to be arrested and were taken to concentration camps but most of them were released after three months under the condition that the leave Germany immediately. The pogrom resulted to more radical anti- Jewish measures; the Nazi regime planned the next steps after the riot on 12 November (Loewenberg 319). The Nazis Party radical Hermann Goring stated categorically that decision must be made and ensure that all the competent authorities of the German regime should take appropriate measures towards eliminating the Jews from the economy of Germany. Therefore, after the pogrom the German Jews’ economic damage and persecution continued. As a result, significant number of Jews was leaving the country. 10 months after the Kristallnacht, over 116,000 Jews left the Reich (Volkov 281). Kristallnacht was characterized by key developments and “turning- points” that have been linked to the Holocaust that occurred several years later (Longerich 88). Most scholars such as Noakes, Pridham, and Evans argue that major turning- point in Nazi anti- Semitism was in autumn 1937 and not with Kristallnacht in 1938; general radicalization of the Nazi regime was a major turning- point (Bauer 560). The replacement of the conservatives by the Nazi in the diplomatic, administration, and the military service in what most historians consider as a “second revolution” contributed immensely to the radicalization. However, Bauer disagrees with this opinion as he considers Kristallnacht to be the main origin of the Holocaust (Bauer 554). He further argues that the radical anti- Jewish measures adopted by the Nazi regime after the Kristallnacht set in motion the events that led to the Holocaust. The Nazis Party became clear through Hermann Goring that there was need for a decision to be made and ensure that all the competent authorities of the German regime should take appropriate measures towards eliminating the Jews from the economy of Germany (Schleunes 121). Works Cited Bauer, Yehuda. “The Kristallnacht as Turning Point: Jewish Reactions to Nazi Policies.” In The Origins of the Holocaust, edited by Michael Marrus, 553-569. Westport, CT: Meckler, 1989. Bendersky, Joseph. A history of Nazi Germany: 1919-1945. 2nd Ed. Burnham Publishers, 2000. Berenbaum, Michael. “The November Pogroms: Kristallnacht and Its Aftermath.” In Witness to the Holocaust, 40-68. New York: HarperCollins Publishers, 1997. Evans, Richard. The Third Reich bin Power. Allen Lane, 2005. Print. Fisher, David. Kristallnacht: The Nazi Night of Terror. New York: Times Books, 1989. Friedlander, Saul. Nazi Germany and the Jews: The Years of Persecution, 1933-1939. Harper Perrenial, 1998. Gilbert, Martin. Kristallnacht: Prelude to Destruction. New York: HarperCollins, 2006. Kaplan, Marion A. Between Dignity and Despair: Jewish Life in Nazi Germany. New York: Oxford University Press, 1998. Longerich, Peter. Holocaust: The Nazi Persecution and Murder of Jews. Oxford University Press, 2010. Loewenberg, Peter. “The Kristallnacht as a Public Degradation Ritual.” Leo Baeck Institute Year Book 32 (1987): 309-323. Noakes, Jeremy and Pridham, Geoffrey. Nazism 1919-1945, Volume Three: Foreign Policy, War and Racial Extermination. A Documentary Reader. University of Exeter Press, 2001. Print. Noakes, Jeremy and Pridham, Geoffrey. Documents on Nazism: 2. Viking Adult, 1975. Print. Pehle, Walter H., editor. November 1938: From “Reichskristallnacht” To Genocide. New York: Berg, 1991. Schleunes, Karl A. The Twisted Road to Auschwitz: Nazi Policy toward German Jews, 1933-1939. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1990. Volkov, Shulamit. “The ‘Kristallnacht’ in Context: A View from Palestine.” Leo Baeck Institute Year Book 35 (1990): 279-296. Read More