|
Edited on Thu Apr-21-05 09:45 AM by Kellanved
Recent events have caused a lot of threads revolving around the so called “Flakhelfer” Generation of Germans, albeit few posters have realized it. In many of these threads, posters are parroting the rather uninformed punch-lines of Murdoch’s yellow press (and of course other tabloids).
I don’t dismiss the possibility of individual guilt – members of that generation have participated in terrible crimes. Nor do I discount the collective guilt, carried by all Germans, regardless of their generation.
But what is happening at the moment, is a conviction on the basis of assumed guilt – whatever the assumption is intended to be individual or collective is impossible to discern.
The trauma shared by all members of the Flakhelfer generation, the people who had their socialization in Nazi Germany, but their adult life in the Federal Republic/ the GDR, has shaped the modern Federal Republic of Germany like very few other things. It might be the very thing defining the Federal Republic.
Dealing with that past, is widely considered the basis of the post-war German intellectualism. So what past are we talking about?
We are not talking about people who fought the Nazis thugs during the Weimar republic. We are not talking about political activists – whatever age. We are not talking about college/university students.
We are talking about children who never went to school in a Democratic country, people who were subjected to propaganda in school from year one.
There is one term getting thrown around : “Hitler Jugend”. It is not without importance in the matter, but it is not really the organization which caused the ambivalence in the current discussion.
The Hitler Jugend (“Hitler Youth”), short “HJ”, was the Nazi youth/brainwashing organization. The activities included pre-military training, “normal” youth activities and consumption of propaganda.
Like the “Arbeiterfront” did with the Unions, the HJ was intended to completely replace all existing youth organizations; be it Scouts, church youth, political youth organizations and so on.
To achieve that goal, the HJ was made mandatory in 1939, while at the same time all other organizations were banned; all children aged 10+ were forced to join the HJ; the police enforced the law. Avoiding the HJ was not generally impossible, but doing so depended on the geographical position and the social/political background – for instance a Social Democrat in the Ruhr area was more likely to find allies in the endeavour than someone in a more rural area, or someone from a family without a political background. For certain, such a move meant dropping out of school, basically out of the society.
Starting in 1943 HJ volunteers were used to support regular troops; during the “Volkssturm” i.e. the suicidal battle for the cities, numerous fanatic HJ members were sent to their deaths.
Far more important and the basis for the accusation however, is the deployment as “Flakhelfer” (“AA support”); officially “Luftwaffenhelfer” (“Air force support”).
In 1942 the tide of the war turned. The Nazis were forced to re-deploy 120.000 men belonging to support and AA units to the eastern front. To fill the gaps, Hitler ordered to draft the male high school classes with students born in 1926 and 1927 (and later: 1928).
Against the protests of many high-ranking Nazis fearing the lack of indoctrination during the deployment and possible propagandistic backlashes, the order went into effect.
In February 1943, the students of said classes got their draft notice, written by the local mayors. The “Flakhelfer” were deployed as classes, together with their teachers. The school education continued - or was intended to continue - during the deployment, in the beginning in the schools; later, when the students were deployed far away from their homes, in the field.
The drafted were given uniforms identical to the ones of the HJ volunteers; they were not considered regular soldiers and not members of the Wehrmacht. In fact the HJ and the Army were in a constant battle about the control of the “Flakhelfer” program; while the HJ retained the right to choose the symbols, there are numerous reports about the program being used to slip out of the ideological control of the HJ.
However, a military deployment without more than the most basic training, at that young an age, caused massive trauma in many – if not all – subjected to it.
The major difference between the HJ volunteers and the “Flakhelfer” is just that: the “Flakhelfer” weren’t volunteers.
Having brought up the terms, I want you to consider it in a fair way. I don’t ask you to forgive a whole generation, nor do I think the question whatever or not they were victims themselves is important in this context.
But I do believe that it should take more thought than a few poorly written articles and a quick google search to argue for banning a whole generation from holding high offices.
I do so for two reasons. The first reason being, that tying this broad a problem and the due discussion to individuals would mean that we won’t be having the discussion in a few years. I see great danger in that.
The second: members of the “Flakhelfer” generation grew up to be among the greatest thinkers of post-war Europe. It is very doubtful, that –for instance - a Günther Grass, one of the most famous progressive thinkers, would have written his Nobel-price winning analysing novels about the society without his special background.
Knowing the background is important to understand a person. But the background does not automatically imply a certain position, nor does it say much about the mindset. Using positions formulated recently, will lead to better, more valid and more respectable criticism.
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
