Before and during the war, what was the internal opposition to the Nazi party like? I'm sure there were some movements against the Third Reich, but they are very hard to come by. I actually plan on reading that famous book Rise and Fall of the Third Reich soon, but I was just wondering what kind of popular knowledge there is of that opposition.
A google search was fruitless and I don't like wikipedia for this stuff.
so you don't like wikipedia but google is ok?
stupid troll.
Ah, just found this. And now I remember that Tom Cruise movie, but they weren't in opposition as much as they just wanted to take over, right?
Anyway, doesn't seem like there was much, especially the infamous Hitler Youth.
buffy the history slayer wrote:
http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/article.php?lang=en&ModuleId=10005208Ah, just found this. And now I remember that Tom Cruise movie, but they weren't in opposition as much as they just wanted to take over, right?
Anyway, doesn't seem like there was much, especially the infamous Hitler Youth.
My grandfather won his local Hitler Youth's 5k run. Seriously.
The US Holocaust Museum? Yeah, that's an unbiased resource. LOL
Hitler imprisoned 3-4 million political opponents before the war even started. Anyone from the socialists to Adenauer's party (he was the first post-war Chancellor but already a political leader in the Weimar Republic). That probably put a lid on things.
Actually if you use google scholar you can find many articles that are written for scholarly magazines. Only problem most are eric, jstor, and the like where you need to buy the article.
Either way it is way better than wiki.
Look up "Hitler's Willing Executioners"
This was a recent controversial book. Obviously a touchy subject.
Were the Nazis any different than the southern rednecks in the U.S. in the early 20th century?
Look up the Weisse Rose movement which culminated in the execution of six university students in Munich. There was a lot of resistance to the NSDAP in the Wehrmacht and you can easily research the numerous attempts on Hitler's life. Also, there was a lot of non-violent resistance organized through the Catholic church. (not the pope, but local German parishes)
I don't recommend reading Shirer's book until you have a firm knowledge of the German political structure especially in the Weimar period. The book isn't exactly easy reading.
formidable doer of the nasty wrote:
The US Holocaust Museum? Yeah, that's an unbiased resource. LOL
Hitler imprisoned 3-4 million political opponents before the war even started. Anyone from the socialists to Adenauer's party (he was the first post-war Chancellor but already a political leader in the Weimar Republic). That probably put a lid on things.
Don't forget though there's a little bit of good in every bad person. Give Hitler credit. He tried to do something about the homosexuals.
yes one difference of the top of my head, they were statists/socialists who liked to intimidate dissenting voices...like today's U.S. liberals.
Pittman wrote:
Were the Nazis any different than the southern rednecks in the U.S. in the early 20th century?
Plus, just like today's US liberals, Hitler was a vegetarian. Wow, the similarities are eerie!
WWRD wrote:
yes one difference of the top of my head, they were statists/socialists who liked to intimidate dissenting voices...like today's U.S. liberals.
Really? Is it the Democrats who run every moderate out of the party as fast as they can?
The Nazi followers were not that different to the southern rednecks or square-state fatasses who followed Bush. It was pretty much the same playbook. Prominent building destroyed, blame it on a Middle Eastern race/faith group, use it as an excuse to wage war and suspend civil liberties at home. Demonize all dissidents as haters of the fatherland. Etc. etc. A lot of Germans drank the Koolaid, especially the poor and uneducated ones.
I never understood why Karl Rove gets so much credit. He basically copied the Nazis step by step.
There was a lot of opposition. Why else did Hitler imprison millions of people? Of course, he also did great things for Germany in the meantime. When people are worried about whether they are going to survive the next day, they are not going to care about whether or not the Nazis work against a group of people (the Jews) that the people believed caused the failure of World War One. In a sense, one can argue that nationalism allowed for the rise of the Nazi Party. And even within the party there were divisions. Hence why Hitler got rid of many other party leaders once they realized that the party was going in a different direction than simply making Germany great again.
Sarcastro wrote:
Plus, just like today's US liberals, Hitler was a vegetarian. Wow, the similarities are eerie!
And just like today's liberals he hated labour unions, gays, communism, and feminism.
Hey, wait a minute...
Yup there was plenty of resistance. The Nazis killed the libs, gays, Gypsies, Jews, etc. that resisted. But Nationalism was the evil for the preceding 500 years. Nations of people invented 'races' out of pure mythology and then used it to brainwash soldiers and citizens. The British, Catholic Church, U.S. South did that to justify slavery. Japan invented a superior race and used it to murder 20 million Chinese and Asians. The British invented the industrial revolution, used it to build machines that rampaged continents murdering more that any empire in history, over 100 million in Afica, India, Asia alone. Nationalism still plagues us today. Israel uses the nationalist hate of former German Socialist, Thodor Herzl, to rape and slaugther their very own mirror image identical semite people, the Palestinians. Israel just massacred 3,000 Gazans in January 2009.
The nazis didn't kill the "libs". The "libs" are an invention of American conservatives. In Europe, liberal is understood according to its true liberalist roots which run counter to socialism and conservatism. In most countries you'll find the liberal parties more closely aligned with conservative partners, but usually they are fairly centrist in their policies, being socially liberal and fiscally responsible. The term "super-liberal" would be the equivalent of the American "libertarian".
Hitler imprisoned all his political opponents, i.e. basically all non-Nazis, even his former coalition partners in the conservative party. But only socialists, gays, handicapped, gypsies, Jews, and people aiding those groups went to the death camps.
[quote]WWRD wrote:
yes one difference of the top of my head, they were statists/socialists who liked to intimidate dissenting voices...like today's U.S. liberals.
Are you forgetting "You're with us, or you're against us"?
Don't question what we say! You question us, you're not a patriot. You hate America. They're gonna hit us again!
We just spent 8 years with a bunch of bullies who tried to crush every dissenting voice in the world.
lets see...running a moderate out of the party...hmm...does the name Joe Lieberman ring a bell?
Wendell Gee wrote:
WWRD wrote:yes one difference of the top of my head, they were statists/socialists who liked to intimidate dissenting voices...like today's U.S. liberals.
Really? Is it the Democrats who run every moderate out of the party as fast as they can?