What Role Did The Nazi Past Play For West German Activists Of The Student Movement?

The typical assumption incorporates the prominent role of Nazi past in the student unrest throughout the 1960 s and 1970 s. Historians assuming this stance evoke a transnational approach, noticing that while other countries student movements were declining, West German student movements were continuing and becoming more radicalised. The Nazi past was deemed the cause of this due to its uniqueness. Yet this viewpoint fails to acknowledge other factors that instigated activist movements amongst students. Moreover, appropriating the role of the Nazi past as the primal cause of unrest assumes a singular framework or understanding of the Nazi past amongst students, which was not the case. This notion is one that historians have begun to rebuke& a wider consensus suggests students were not protesting against the Nazi past, but instead against wider issues such as fascism, third world liberation and education standards. This angle is met with criticism from opposing historians who suggest students adopted lexicon associated with National Socialism in their political campaigns. Throughout the course of this essay, a deductive approach validated through primary sources, will be assumed aiming to refute this side of the historical debate. Students` use of the Nazi past will be referred to as metaphorical and instrumental. Coming to this conclusion will involve a study of a series of contradictions taking form in political events and leaders conveying the discrepancies in the application of the Nazi past. Furthering this argument will appropriate not just the Sozialistischer Deutscher Studentenbund (SDS), but other groups involved in the student movement& hence contributing a wider scope to the role of the Nazi past in student unrest.

If significance were to be attached to the role of the Nazi past for West German student activists, it would be rooted in the SDS s gravitation towards the New Left during the outset of the movement. Horst Mahler a member of the SDS and lawyer for the Baader-Meinhof complex alleged students in their contemporary society were living under the shadow of their parents` crimes under National Socialism.[1] & Thus, students desired a theory that liberated them from this stigma. Hans Kundnani explains, through an array of critical theorists, how texts including Dialectic of Enlightenment and One-Dimensional Man became attractive to students.[2] Often it is assumed that critical theorists acquitted students of any guilt related to National Socialism. Yet rarely do historians acknowledge the diversity within the Frankfurt School s ideas on the Nazi past, an aspect that Timothy Scott Brown can be commended for. Adorno when reflecting on anti-Semitism whilst stating there were roots in capitalism, identifies the outset of National Socialism in a pre-bourgeois society hence not acquitting students of guilt. This was an aspect students chose to ignore already, demonstrating their selective use of the Nazi past.[3] In contrast, Marcuse appropriated the role of totalitarianism and fascism making no direct references to Nazism.[4] From this notion, it could be argued students did not seek theories concerning the Nazi past in critical theory, as theorists gave no definitive one& and, furthermore, that students may have tailored critical theory to their individual conceptions of the Nazi past. Furthermore, identifying a singular framework of the Nazi past among students should not be expected, but instead a further mirroring of discrepancies among critical theorists.

The split in the Frankfurt School concerning what role the Nazi past should play in revolution is further exemplified and mirrored by key political figures of the student movement. Conveyed is a more complex role of the Nazi past than originally assumed, demanding the need for cross comparison. Recognised by historiography is the importance of Rudi Dutschke&[5] one of Dutschke s friends, Bahman Nirumand, documented how Dutschke looked more towards the future than the past. [6] In Dutschke s autobiography published in 1981, he reduces the Third Reich to monopoly capitalism, allowing for the dissolution of guilt placed upon West German activists. However, as Nirumand draws upon, Dutschke chose not to dwell on the issue of the Nazi past, instead diverting his attention to the dismantling of the establishment, meanwhile suggesting the Nazi past to be a hindrance to revolution.[7] Dutschke s theory on the Nazi past bears resemblance to Marcuse s theory which forwards the prominent role of fascism as opposed to Nazism suggesting the Nazi past to be of little significance. In contrast, his counterpart Ulrike Meinhof later becoming the leader of the Red Army Faction openly discussed the Nazi past, vowing to never repeat the mistakes of her father. This is demonstrated in her article published for Konkret magazine in which she openly critiques the elder generation for their Nazi crimes whilst also asserting the continuation of Nazism in contemporary society, particularly the justice system, Josef Strauss acting as the epitome character for this claim.[8] However Meinhof s views don t seem to find foundations in the Frankfurt School, presenting a lack of theoretical basis to her stance. However, what can be shown through the cross comparison used, is the discrepancies amongst political leaders on what the role of the Nazi past should be in contemporary society and further action. This conveys the difficulty in assuming the Nazi past had a singular framework or understanding throughout student unrest, to concur one overarching role of the Nazi past becomes impossible due to its varied forms amongst the movement.

Not only was there ambiguity on the role of the Nazi past among political leaders, but also within the individual political character. As Hans Kundnani identifies, the role of the Nazi past assumed mixed feelings with Ulrike Meinhof being the primary example of this confliction. As already discussed, her article A man with good manners presents the guilt of the elder generation, acknowledging them to be a generation of perpetrators.[9] However, in another article Dresden, Meinhof turns the Germans, including the elder generation, into victims of National Socialism and the establishment.[10] She looks at how the allies attacked innocent victims, with authority being deceptive to soldiers about the reasons for attacks. Historiography often tries to determine whether then the 1960 s and 1970 s presents Germany as a nation of victims or perpetrators. With the rise of judicial trials including the Eichmann Trial in 1961 and the Frankfurt-Auschwitz Trial in 1963 alongside the student s considerable protest concerning the continuation of Nazism in the judicial system, often we associate the period to one identifying with the perpetrator. However, Ruth Wittlinger concurs that this approach is too simplistic, which can be supported by the above example of Ulrike Meinhof s conversing conceptions. Wittlinger becomes cynical about the role of the Nazi past in student unrest for this reason, she assumes the constant back and forth between victim and perpetrator theme reflected the selective nature of the student movement aligning to a particular political agenda, alongside inherent contradictions in the application of the Nazi past.

The amount of discrepancy concerning the role of the Nazi past among the individual, implies the Nazi past was one of adaptability and selectivity. Students throughout unrest consistently evoked vocabulary and imagery associated with Nazism. Historians who attempt to argue for the role of the Nazi past use this as their vantage point by suggesting the Nazi past played some form of indefinite role yet they become blind-sighted to the fact this could have been a mere tool of political propaganda, directed towards attaining the attention of a wider population. [11] An evident example of this conveyed through Meinhof when she was imprisoned for her actions within the RAF. Upon trial, she styled herself as famous Nazi resistance leader Sophie Scholl, while also comparing her treatment in Stammheim prison to Auschwitz. Later Dan Diner formulated, what is known and used widely throughout historiography, as the exonerating project. From this he reflects on the student s attachment of imagery relating to the Holocaust to wider international political events as a form of propaganda.[12] The primary example and most consistent, aligning with the victim theme, is the student s assertion of themselves as the news Jews, otherwise known as Achtundsechziger. Proving this to be metaphorical becomes challenging to historians however can be developed by posing the question as to whether the utilisation of imagery and phrasing associated with National Socialism was perceived anywhere other than key political events. As Jarausch later presents, finding such sources prove increasingly difficult, as often such comparisons are located in sources that were available in the contemporary public sphere.[13]

Political turmoil was a key feature of the 1960s and 1970s& Vietnam was the main event galvanising the students into political action beyond the realms of university. The projection of the Nazi past onto Vietnam was in abundance and encompassed varying forms. Yet the ambivalent nature of the Nazi past yet again resurfaces through parallels appropriated. Students presented their own victimisation through a comparison of napalm bombs and the bombing of Germany by the allies, thus aligning with the theme of Germany as a victim. On the other hand, students also gave comparisons of the Holocaust to the killings of innocent victims in Vietnam. Already presented is the lack of consistent approach and projection of the Nazi past onto the actions and understandings of Vietnam. Dan Diner s exoneration thesis becomes evident in the use of such comparisons, and can be furthered, SDS students in 1966 declared Vietnam another genocide emanating from imperialist political and economic interests. [14] Diner here would focus upon the phrase genocide which was unique to the Holocaust, the term being specifically created for the Nuremberg Tribunal, here being used a universal metaphor. This presents issues of collective memory,[15] as students attempt to refashion its meaning and application to Nazi Germany& with students exerting blame they experienced in the midst of National Socialism onto other countries. [16] However, there were imminent consequences to this approach. Using Auschwitz as a metaphor in a universal framework meant that the true meaning of the Nazism was lost, with it no longer being a uniquely German phenomenon.[17] From this notion, it can be inferred that students attached no real value concern to the Nazi past, instead using it to achieve a wider political agenda and reshaping collective memory.

General historical consensus alludes to other issues playing a more critical role in the demonstrations against Vietnam. Schmidkte analyses the student s perception of Vietnam as a US quasi-fascist force.[18] Prominent among historiography is the role of conflicted attitudes towards the US from West German students in Vietnam protests. Students saw Vietnam to be an American war& they recognised the contradictory stature of the US recognising them as liberators from fascism yet now bestowing fascism in Vietnam. It can be asserted then that perceptions on the US and fascism played apparent roles in activists` protests against Vietnam. Yet another crucial factor, if not the most important, that can be observed in protests was the role of Third-World liberation, something students aligned closely too. Such a viewpoint is recognised by historian Uta Poiger who claims the linkage of Vietnam and the Nazi past acted as a political tool that confirmed the lack of morals in the bourgeois West, helping students to align with third-world countries further.[19] Poiger then implies that the Nazi past had no real significance except as a tool allowing for further ideologies to come to prominence, allowing imperialism, third-world liberation and other issues to assume a primary role.[20] Supporting this, when referring back to the quotation presented in the previous paragraph, such issues including imperialism are also mentioned alongside Nazi terminology. With the theme and importance of fascism being conveyed through the discussion of Vietnam, the centrality of fascism remains to be explored. This theme cannot go unrecognised, as Nazism could potentially be categorised under the wider label of fascism. Recently historians have aimed to reconcile the place of fascism throughout historiography of the Nazi past. The extremity of this debate is demonstrated by Michael Schmidkte in 2006. Through a thematic approach and use of primary sources, he concludes that a new theory of fascism was the overarching cause of student unrest, not the Nazi past.[21] However, he reduces his thesis mainly to the study of a particular newspaper Das Argument a Marxist paper published in 1959 at the Berlin Institute for Critical Theory which is too narrow.[22] He also fails to recognise how Frankfurt and Berlin were theoretically competing cities, to generalise the whole movement upon Berlin is too limiting. However, combining this factor, repression placed upon students,[23] primary sources and Marcuse s theory& strong foundations are set allowing for the production of a thesis recognising the primary concern of the students with fascism as opposed to Nazism. Sources that reference fascism as the focal point of unrest are in abundance, including Dutschke s The Students and the Revolution, [24] and two RAF manifestos named The Urban Guerrilla Concept 1971 [25] and The Black September, 1972. [26] These sources already encapsulate the prominence of fascism as an issue for two of the most recognised student groups throughout West Germany, while failing to even acknowledge the Nazi past.

The consideration of fascism as a primary role for student unrest, leads to further questioning as to what else could be considered a primary role for West German student activists. Konrad Jarausch considers alternative causes for unrest combining this with an array of primary sources including diaries and letters, a methodology that other historians avoid. He reflects how students often came from Liberal or Socialist families, implying generational conflict and the Nazi past to be an issue for only a few radical activists such as Meinhof.[27] Jarausch focuses on the education crisis, which has been lost in the backdrop as a cause for the unrest.[28] The loss of this factor can be rooted in historiographies tendency to seek socio-psychological concepts as opposed to more simplistic ones. & Yet locating the roots of the movement sees the educational crisis as crucial, hence Jarausch can be commended for his scope) and for how far he dates back. Copious primary sources assert this viewpoint. Georg Picht s The German Education Crisis, [29] and Wolfagang Kubualla s Where the Cows are Still out to Pasture, [30] both recognise unsatisfactory educational conditions. Figures discussed present a 30:1 ratio of professors to students alongside failing university reforms and a lack of student voice. The significance of this issue lies in the fact that all groups of the student movement could relate to this problem despite political alignment. University conditions being a causation for the mobility of all student movements.

Drawn upon in the above analysis is the historian s tendency to analyse the student unrest through the study of the SDS. The SDS were the largest movement explaining the historian s reasons for applying this methodology. However, recently historians have begun to provide alternate narratives recognising other groups to be influential even if they were smaller. When approaching sources from the Free Democratic Party student movement, Nazism is not a primary issue. Karl Hermann Flach identifies fascism as the root cause of unrest exacerbating the primary role of fascism. Yet some movements refused to recognise fascism or the Nazi past as Michael Hocksgeschwender presents in his focus on the Catholic student movement where he identifies individualism as the main cause of student unrest.[31] Anna Von Der G ltz offers insight to the Christian Democratic un ion (RCDS) student movement, who, similar to the Catholic movement, saw no use of the Nazi past and promotes that the Nazi past had in fact been overcome.[32] Nor did they see usage in fascism, evident by their blockade around a Vietnam War ambassador in Germany to protect them from the SDS. G ltz also identifies how the RCDS students were prominent members of student councils in the early days of the 1960s implying they did have a role in the student movement. For the Catholic movement and RCDS the Nazi past is non-existent, yet historical ignorance which focuses merely on social climate has caused a blind spot to other groups. Evaluating a role of the Nazi past involves the incorporation of all those groups involved. When placing other student organisations into the wider picture, the student unrest becomes more porous and the role of the Nazi past even more devalued than before.

However historian Wolfgang Kraushaar would disagree, he claimed that the radical left made extreme contributions to fighting anti-Semitism, although he gives no real evidence to support his thesis. Evidence supports ly s thesis, unlike Kraushaar s, he draws upon the attempted bombing of the Jewish community centre on the commemoration of Kristallnacht, leading to the assumption that anti-Semitism was prevalent.

Democratic Liberation Front of Palestine. Yet Israel was a state given to the Jews in the post-war settlement. This situation presented a crossroads for students and is increasingly insightful to historians. As students chose to side with the Israelis this confirms our previous point that the fascism exceeded the Nazi past on a hierarchical scale. The choice itself does not directly represent anti-Semitism, however the students following actions did. The hijacking of Lufthansa Flight 181 in 1977 saw Jewish hostages being taken. Moreover, the 1972 Munich Olympic games saw the terrorist organisation Black September execute eleven Olympians from Israel with support from students and neo Nazis in West Germany. Students could have sided with Palestine without becoming involved in anti-Semitic activities. Yet students chose to revive the anti-Semitism which was a huge feature of the Nazi past, repeating the same mistakes of the generation before them. Hence, it can be inferred that the Nazi past played no theoretical role for students, as they evidently chose to ignore the very basis of it proving its previous metaphorical role.