| Revision as of 01:55, 27 April 2006 editDrogo Underburrow (talk | contribs)1,815 editsm adding Notes← Previous edit | Revision as of 08:20, 27 April 2006 edit undoStr1977 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers59,112 edits the origin clearly lies with Hindenburg and Ludendorff (seen as having insight), regardless of who used which words firstNext edit → | ||
| Line 37: | Line 37: | ||
| In 1919 the ] (National Militia) already began "educating" an impressionable ] about the causes of the war and the defeat, firmly placing the ''Dolchstoßlegende'' in his mind; it was Ludendorff who would lead the unsuccessful ] on ], ] together with Hitler; it was the Reichswehr which provided early funding to the Nazi Party; and it was an 85-year-old Paul von Hindenburg who would appoint Hitler as chancellor of Germany on January 30, 1933. | In 1919 the ] (National Militia) already began "educating" an impressionable ] about the causes of the war and the defeat, firmly placing the ''Dolchstoßlegende'' in his mind; it was Ludendorff who would lead the unsuccessful ] on ], ] together with Hitler; it was the Reichswehr which provided early funding to the Nazi Party; and it was an 85-year-old Paul von Hindenburg who would appoint Hitler as chancellor of Germany on January 30, 1933. | ||
| The official birth of the legend can be dated to mid ], when Ludendoorf was having lunch with a British general Sir Neil Malcolm. Malcolm asked Ludendorff why it was that he thought Germany lost the war. |
The official birth of the legend can be dated to mid ], when Ludendoorf was having lunch with a British general Sir Neil Malcolm. Malcolm asked Ludendorff why it was that he thought Germany lost the war. Ludendorff replied with his list of excuses: The home front failed us etc. Then, Sir Neil Malcolm said that "it sounds like you were stabbed in the back then?" The phrase was to Ludendoorfs liking and he let it be known amongst the general staff that this was the 'official' version and then the myth was disseminated throughout German society. This was picked up by right wing political factions and used as a form of attack against the hated Weimar regime, who were the exponents of the revolution. The term "November criminals" refers both to the statesmen who signed the Treaty of Versailles and to a vast Jewish-Marxist conspiracy that was often interpreted as including Germans who were not considered sufficiently patriotic or ]. It was also applied to those who participated in the revolution that overthrew the imperial government and instituted the Weimar Republic. The basis of evidence that they drew upon existed heavily in the form of figures like Kurt Eisner; a Berlin born Jew (his own description) who lived in Munich. He was producing literature about the illegal nature of the war from 1916 onwards and he also had a large hand in the Munich revolution, from which the right wing counter revolution then took place. | ||
| An alternate view of the origin is given by historian Richard Steigmann-Gall. He says that the legend traces back to a sermon preached on February 3, 1918, by Protestant Court Chaplain Bruno Doehring, six months before the war had even ended.<ref>Richard Steigmann–Gall, The Holy Reich: Nazi Conceptions of Christianity, 1919–1945 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003) p. 16</ref> | |||
| The myth was believed by many as no Allied soldiers had stepped foot on German soil and German troops stood in just before Paris in the West. Furthermore Germany had just concluded the treaty of Brest Litovsk not that long ago with Russia in the east. Many who believed in the utter invincibility of the army asserted that the statesmen who had signed the Treaty of Versailles were traitors, and that victory would have eventually come as long as the home front had not capitulated in such an unglorious fashion. A point supported by the fact that the German leadership believed in fair and just conditions of a peace treaty, based upon Woodrow Wilson's 14 Points. As a result of the treaty, Germany's territory instead reduced by a third, the ] was demilitarized and Allied troops were to occupy many areas. There were also enormous ] to be paid for a period of 70 years (until 1988). From a propaganda perspective, perhaps the most important aspect of the treaty was the ], which forced Germany to accept complete responsibility for the war. | The myth was believed by many as no Allied soldiers had stepped foot on German soil and German troops stood in just before Paris in the West. Furthermore Germany had just concluded the treaty of Brest Litovsk not that long ago with Russia in the east. Many who believed in the utter invincibility of the army asserted that the statesmen who had signed the Treaty of Versailles were traitors, and that victory would have eventually come as long as the home front had not capitulated in such an unglorious fashion. A point supported by the fact that the German leadership believed in fair and just conditions of a peace treaty, based upon Woodrow Wilson's 14 Points. As a result of the treaty, Germany's territory instead reduced by a third, the ] was demilitarized and Allied troops were to occupy many areas. There were also enormous ] to be paid for a period of 70 years (until 1988). From a propaganda perspective, perhaps the most important aspect of the treaty was the ], which forced Germany to accept complete responsibility for the war. | ||
Revision as of 08:20, 27 April 2006
The Dolchstoßlegende, (German "dagger-thrust legend", often translated in English as "stab-in-the-back legend") refers to a social mythos and persecution-propaganda and belief among bitter post-World War I German nationalists, that laid blame for the loss of the war upon non-Germans and non-nationalists.
Some critics consider the post-WWII Stalin Note to be a second post-war stab in the back because the 1952 Stalin Note proposed German reunification and Superpower disengagement from Central Europe but the United States and its allies rejected the offer.
Motivation
Most Germans supported, fought in, or suffered in an enormously costly World War I. From the German and some more neutral points of view, it was widely believed that Czarist Imperial Russia had exploited the issue in the Balkans. Many Germans saw the war as part of the eternal struggle against the "invading hordes from the east". While pan-Slavism and Russian expansionism had to be considered, French revanchism lingering from 1870 was also seen as a primary reason for the war. From the German point of view, the British were seen to be equally opportunistic, determined to dismantle the powerful German Empire that had disrupted Britain's dominance over trade and threatened her vast commercial empire.
However, with their leaflet and tabloid war, the British and American press were particularly successful in establishing the view that the German Empire was as an exporter of Prussian "militarism", guilty of crimes against humanity. After Imperial Russia dropped out of the war, the supposed contrast between the "free" and "democratic" world that wanted peace and the opposing autocratic, barbaric German-led autocracies that wanted war was heavily exploited. This was an extremely important development that helped the American leadership justify their country's involvement in a war President Woodrow Wilson said would "make the world safe for democracy."
In his memoirs, Erich Ludendorff consistently points out that the Hohenzollern leadership failed to acknowledge the power of Entente propaganda during World War I. It should be no surprise that from 1933-1945, the Germans made it a point to master the craft which the Entente had introduced so effectively during World War I. Although frequently depicted as primordial aggressors responsible for the war, Germany's peace proposals were all but rejected. After the first year of the war, both sides realized a peace without annexations and indemnities, not to mention the loss of territory, would constitute as political suicide; too many lives had been lost for the war to be purposeless. Thus, German proposals included the ability to retain the territory it occupied in the West, namely part of Belgium.
Ludendorff was convinced that the Entente wanted little other than a draconian peace. This was not the message most Germans heard coming from the other side and Wilson's Fourteen Points plan was particularly popular amongst the German people. Socialists and liberals, especially the Social Democrats that formed the majority of the parliamentary body, were already agitators for change prior to 1914. When peace and full restoration were promised by the Entente, they needed little further encouragement to shed their patriotic enthusiasm. Likewise, Germany's allies began to question the reason for the war as the conflict dragged on and found their answer in Allied propaganda.
As Austria-Hungary began to suffer from internal strife due to its multi-national composition, Germany soon found herself "chained to a dead horse". From the other point of view, however, Germany was continuing a fight the rest of her Central Power allies no longer wished to carry on. When the armistice finally came in 1918, Ludendorff's prophecy came true almost immediately. Although the fighting had ended, the British maintained their blockade of the European continent for a full year, leading to starvation and severe malnutrition across the nation. The peace that was quickly signed by Weimar Republic politicians and established at Versailles Treaty would prove to be punishingly devastating, and certainly not what the German peace-seeking populace had expected.
Conservatives, nationalists and ex-military leaders sought others to blame. The common scapegoats were Weimar Republic politicians, socialists, communists, and "international Jewry" — a term referring to Jews with a perceived excess of wealth and influence. These "November criminals", nationalists alleged, had "stabbed them in the back" on the "home front," by either criticizing the cause of German nationalism, instigating unrest and strikes in the critical military industries or profiteering. In essence the accusation was that the accused committed treason against the benevolent and righteous common cause.
These theories were given credence by the fact that when Germany surrendered in November 1918, its armies were still in French and Belgian territory - in fact earlier in 1918 the Michael offensive had come close to winning the war for Germany. Its failure was blamed on strikes in the arms industry at a critical moment of the offensive, leaving soldiers without an adequate supply of materiel. The strikes were instigated by treasonous elements, with the Jews taking most of the blame. In addition Germany had already won the war against Russia. This overlooked Germany's strategic position and ignored how the efforts of individuals were somewhat marginalized on the front, since the belligerents were engaged in a new kind of war. The industrialization of war had dehumanized the process, and made possible a new kind of defeat which the Germans suffered.
Non-combatants and homefront production became of great influence as a total war emerged. There was a considerable amount of political tension prior to the war, especially due to the growing presence of socialists in the Bundesrat. This was a great concern for the absolutists in power. Some historians believe this to be one of the reasons Austria-Hungary committed itself to war even though diplomatic solutions had not been completely exhausted. Although there are many possible causes for World War I, some saw it as an opportunity to unite the nation with a decisive victory, diminishing the threat of social insurrection.
The outbreak of the war erased many of the divisions that had existed in German society initially; Roman Catholics, Jews, Lutherans, socialists, right-wingers and liberals were all overcome by the phenomenon of the "spirit of 1914". Yet, as the war dragged on, old divisions resurfaced. Suspicion of Catholics, Social Democrats and Jews grew as initial enthusiasms subsided and their national loyalty was questioned once again. Those who were profiting from the war were also subject to criticism, as well as industrial workers involved in labor strikes. Krupp himself was accused of manufacturing arms for both sides, which was extremely profitable. Individual interests were guided by the behavior of individuals in other sectors. As administrators meddled with the economy by introducing price ceilings and other measures, producers often responded by switching goods, thus creating shortages. This created a great amount of tension between urban and rural settings and, more importantly, exacerbated hardships and bred discord. In 1917, there were roughly five hundred strikes across Germany, resulting in over 2,000,000 total work days lost.
Still, civil disorder was a result of an inability to make ends meet, not a shortage of patriotism. While it is true that production slumped in 1917 and 1918, the nation had maximized its war effort and could take no more. Raw production figures confirm that Germany could not have possibly won a war of attrition against Britain, France and the United States combined. Despite its overwhelming power, Germany's industrial might and population were matched and outclassed by the Entente as a whole. Russia's exit in 1917 did little to change the overall picture, as the United States joined the war shortly thereafter on April 16, 1917. American industrial capacity overtook Germany's singlehandedly.
Nevertheless, this social mythos of domestic betrayal resonated among its audience, and its claims would codify the basis for public support for the emerging Nazi Party, under a severely racialist-based form of nationalism. The anti-Semitism was intensified by the Bavarian Soviet Republic, a Communist government which ruled the city of Munich for two weeks before being crushed by the Freikorps militia. Most of the Bavarian Soviet Republic's leaders were Jewish, a fact exploited by anti-Semitic propagandists to tar all Jews with the brush of "Communist treason".
Origins
In the latter part of the war, Germany was practically governed as a military dictatorship, with the Supreme High Command (German: OHL, "Oberste Heeresleitung") and General Field Marshal Paul von Hindenburg as commander-in-chief advising the Kaiser. After the last German offensive on the western front failed in 1918, the German war effort was doomed. In response, OHL arranged for a rapid change to a civilian government. General Erich Ludendorff, Germany's Chief of Staff, said: "I have asked His Excellency to now bring those circles to power which we have to thank for coming so far. We will therefore now bring those gentlemen into the ministries. They can now make the peace which has to be made. They can eat the soup which they have prepared for us!"
On November 11, 1918, the civilian representatives of the newly formed Weimar Republic of Germany signed an armistice with the Allies which would end World War I. The subsequent Treaty of Versailles led to further territorial and financial losses.
As the Kaiser had been forced to abdicate and the military relinquished executive power, it was the temporary, civilian government which "had to" sue for peace. This led to the signing of the Treaty of Versailles. Even though they publicly despised the treaty, it was most convenient for the generals - there were no war crime tribunals, they were celebrated as undefeated heroes, and they could covertly prepare for removing the republic which they had helped to create.
In 1919 the Reichswehr (National Militia) already began "educating" an impressionable Adolf Hitler about the causes of the war and the defeat, firmly placing the Dolchstoßlegende in his mind; it was Ludendorff who would lead the unsuccessful Beer Hall Putsch on November 8, 1923 together with Hitler; it was the Reichswehr which provided early funding to the Nazi Party; and it was an 85-year-old Paul von Hindenburg who would appoint Hitler as chancellor of Germany on January 30, 1933.
The official birth of the legend can be dated to mid 1919, when Ludendoorf was having lunch with a British general Sir Neil Malcolm. Malcolm asked Ludendorff why it was that he thought Germany lost the war. Ludendorff replied with his list of excuses: The home front failed us etc. Then, Sir Neil Malcolm said that "it sounds like you were stabbed in the back then?" The phrase was to Ludendoorfs liking and he let it be known amongst the general staff that this was the 'official' version and then the myth was disseminated throughout German society. This was picked up by right wing political factions and used as a form of attack against the hated Weimar regime, who were the exponents of the revolution. The term "November criminals" refers both to the statesmen who signed the Treaty of Versailles and to a vast Jewish-Marxist conspiracy that was often interpreted as including Germans who were not considered sufficiently patriotic or militaristic. It was also applied to those who participated in the revolution that overthrew the imperial government and instituted the Weimar Republic. The basis of evidence that they drew upon existed heavily in the form of figures like Kurt Eisner; a Berlin born Jew (his own description) who lived in Munich. He was producing literature about the illegal nature of the war from 1916 onwards and he also had a large hand in the Munich revolution, from which the right wing counter revolution then took place.
The myth was believed by many as no Allied soldiers had stepped foot on German soil and German troops stood in just before Paris in the West. Furthermore Germany had just concluded the treaty of Brest Litovsk not that long ago with Russia in the east. Many who believed in the utter invincibility of the army asserted that the statesmen who had signed the Treaty of Versailles were traitors, and that victory would have eventually come as long as the home front had not capitulated in such an unglorious fashion. A point supported by the fact that the German leadership believed in fair and just conditions of a peace treaty, based upon Woodrow Wilson's 14 Points. As a result of the treaty, Germany's territory instead reduced by a third, the Rhineland was demilitarized and Allied troops were to occupy many areas. There were also enormous war reparations to be paid for a period of 70 years (until 1988). From a propaganda perspective, perhaps the most important aspect of the treaty was the War Guilt Clause, which forced Germany to accept complete responsibility for the war.
The treaty became enormously unpopular in Germany, in no small part because it impinged extensively on internal German sovereignty. However, the Allies were willing to gradually scale down the treaty in the coming years to counter the anti-capitalist Soviet Union. Moreover, the Weimar Republic under Friedrich Ebert violently suppressed workers' uprisings with the help of the Reichswehr and tolerated the paramilitary Freikorps forming all across Germany. In spite or because of this tolerance of the extreme right, the republic was viciously attacked, many of its representatives such as Walther Rathenau were assassinated, and the leaders were branded as "criminals" and Jews by the right-wing press dominated by Alfred Hugenberg.
Related concepts outside of Weimar Germany
Other wars have been viewed as winnable but being lost due to betrayal at home. For example, some view this as happening with the Vietnam War, in what was dubbed the Vietnam Syndrome.
Notes
Sources
- Spielvogel, Jackson J. Hitler and Nazi Germany: A History. New Jersey, Prentice Hall: 2001.
- Gerald D. Feldman, "Die Massenbewegungen der Arbeiterschaft in Deutschland am Ende des Ersten Weltkrieges 1917-1920" Politische Vierteljahrschrift 1972.
- Chickering, Roger "Imperial Germany and the Great War, 1914-1918." Cambridge, Cambridge University Press: 2004.
- OSS Psychological Profile of Hitler, Part Five