Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-08T15:29:11.020Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The National Socialist Schülerbund and the Hitler Youth, 1929–1933

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 December 2008

Daniel Horn
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Among the organizations of the National Socialist Party the Hitler Youth has long been regarded as unique because of its large working-class membership, estimated as high as seventy percent, its egalitarianism, and its espousal of social revolutionary doctrines. The NSDAP, we know, was overwhelmingly a lower Mittelstand entity, being composed principally of small shopkeepers, craftsmen, peasants, lower civil servants, and white-collar workers. With the onset of the depression there occurred a fairly large influx of new members from the upper Mittelstand, consisting of independent businessmen and executives, middle and higher ranking civil servants, and members of the academically trained free professions. The arrival of these groups gave the party a somewhat more conservative but also considerably more respectable complexion and contributed much to bring Hitler to power.

Type
Articles
Information
Central European History , Volume 11 , Issue 4 , December 1978 , pp. 355 - 375
Copyright
Copyright © Conference Group for Central European History of the American Historical Association 1978

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. See Stachura, Peter D., Nazi Youth in the Weimar Republic (Santa Barbara, 1975), p. 58Google Scholar, but see also for an earlier statement of the same view Klönne, Arno, Hitlerjugend: Die Jugend und ihre Organisation im Dritten Reich (Hanover, 1956).Google Scholar

2. Kater, Michael H., “Sozialer Wandel in der NSDAP im Zuge der nationalsozialistischen Machtergreifung,” in Schieder, Wolfgang, ed., Der Faschismus ah soziale Bewegung (Hamburg, 1975), pp. 27–31, 34–36.Google Scholar

3. Generally useful works on the Nazi youth movement in addition to those of Stachura and Klönne are Brandenburg, Hans-Christian, Die Geschichte der HJ (Cologne, 1968)Google Scholar; Klose, Werner, Generation im Gleichschritt (Oldenburg, 1964)Google Scholar; and Koch, H. W., The Hitler Youth: Origins and Development, 1922–1945 (New York, 1976).Google Scholar

4. Stachura, pp. 57–62.

5. For the SA, see Bracher, Karl Dietrich, Sauer, Wolfgang, and Schulz, Gerhard, Die Nationalsozialistische Machtergreifung (Cologne and Opladen, 1960) pp. 830–55.Google Scholar

6. Merkl, Peter H., Political Violence under the Swastika: 581 Early Nazis (Princeton, 1975), pp. 383ff.Google Scholar

7. Littmann, Arnold, Herbert Norkus und die Hitlerjungen von Beusselkietz (Berlin, 1934), pp. 181–85.Google Scholar

8. See Klein's, Emil02 10, 1931Google Scholar memorandum, “Die Hitler-Jugend Gau MünchenOberbayem,” and Munich Police Report of Mar. 15, 1931, and Morgenrapport of Apr. 11, 1931, in Hoover Institution, NSDAP Hauptarchiv, Microfilm Roll 71, Folders 1542 and 1540. Hereafter cited as HA 71/1542 and 1540.

9. See Elternvertretung der NSDAP to Reichsleitung, Partei, 07 19, 1930Google Scholar, HA 71/ 1541 and 75/1555.

10. Völkischer Beobachter, Dec. 4, 1930, and Mar. 18, 1931, HA 72/1544.

11. “Bericht über den Stand der Organisation der Berliner HJ,” Jan. 12, 1932, HA 19/362.

12. Stachura, pp. 155 and 185.

13. For the Hamburg group, see police reports of Apr. 3 and 16, 1929, HA 71/1537. For the Berlin group, see the police situation report of Jan. 25, 1930, in HA 71/1537. On Renteln information is available in the Munich police reports of Nov. 7, 1931, and Feb. 15 and May 4, 1932. See HA 71/1540, 1537 and 1555. However, see also Renteln's own description in his “Der Nationalsozialistische Schülerbund,” Nationalsozialistische Monatshefte 1/1 (04 1930): 44–46.Google Scholar Cf. Stachura, p. 22, and Brandenburg, p. 49.

14. For an example of this at Goslar on Aug. 11, 1929, see “Führerbriefe des NSS,” Nov. 11, 1932, HA 18/344.

15. For examples of such alliances, see the Hamburg and Berlin police reports of Oct. 19 and Dec. 23, 1929, in HA 71/1537.

16. Kater, pp. 34–37, 28.

17. See for instance, the Bavarian Ministry of Education order of Nov. 28,1929, HA 71/1537. For manifestations of Nazi outrage at such actions, see Völkischer Beobachter, Jan. 31, 1929 and Feb. 4, 1930, in HA 72/1544.

18. For the formation of such cells in Hamburg, see Völkischer Beobachter, Sept. 22/23, 1929, HA 71/1537.

19. See Nuremberg Police, “Auszug aus dem Lagebericht,” June 6, 1929; Dresden Police, “Auszug aus dem Monatsbericht,” Aug. 18, 1929; Völkischer Beobachter, Nov. 4, 1929, in HA 71/1537, 1541.

20. For Pfeffer's order, see HA 72/1542.

21. See for this the very astute Berlin Police Lagebericht of Jan. 25, 1930, HA 71/1537.

22. See Provinzialschulkollegium to Oberpräsident of Schleswig-Holstein, Feb. 20, 1930, and Director of Municipal Oberrealschule of Flensburg to Provinzialschulkollegium, on the same date, in Landesarchiv Schleswig 301/4557 at Forschungsstelle für die Geschichte des Nationalsozialismus in Hamburg.

23. Ibid.

24. Ibid., Police President of Flensburg to Regierungspräsident in Schleswig on Mar. 19 and 28, 1930. The NSS membership grew from 13 to 41 in the period from Feb. 20 to Mar. 18, 1930.

25. See the extremely important memorandum of Regierungsrat Kuntze of the Reich Interior Ministry, “Der Nationalsozialismus und die Schule” of Mar. 2, 1931, in HA 71/1537 and 14A/1542. See also Sontheimer, Kurt, Antidemokratisches Denken in der Weimarer Republik (Munich, 1962).Google Scholar

26. For these statistics, see Völkischer Beobachter of Mar. 4, 1932, in HA 71/1537. For a list of disciplinary actions, see HA 18/346 and 347. See as well the complaint by the Bayerischer Kurier of Feb. 7, 1932, stating that one explanation for the NSS's growth in Bavaria was the availability of a refuge in Brunswick, HA 71/1537.

27. See the June 14, 1932, memorandum of Dr. Priel, Gauführer of the Thuringian NSS, “Denkschrift über Errichtung einer nationalsozialistischen Siedlerschule,” HA 18/ 349. For concurrence that the economic crisis and the hopelessness it generated were largely responsible for this growth, see Kuntze's Interior Ministry Memorandum, HA 71/1537.

28. For membership statistics from the end of 1930 to the end of 1931, see HA 18/344. The growth took place as follows:

Dec. 1, 1930: 5,075

Mar. 1, 1931: 5,680

June 1, 1931: 6,906

Sept. 1, 1931: 8,906

Dec. 1, 1931: 14,881

Dec. 31, 1931: ca. 16,000

For an estimation of the kind of threat the NSS posed, see Regierungsrat Kuntze's Dec. 14, 1931 speech in HA 72/1542.

29. Renteln, “Jahresbericht des NSS für die Zeit von 1.12.30 bis 31.12.1931,” HA 75/1555.

30. For these early tactics, see Berlin Police Lageberichte, Apr. 15 and May 15, 1930; Auszug aus dem Lagebericht Württemberg, May 21,1930; Halle, Lagebericht, 10–12 1930, all in HA 71/1537.Google Scholar

31. Dienstbuch betreffend Aufbau und Organisation des Nationalsozialistischen Schülerbundes, dated Oct. 15, 1931, HA 18/344.

32. For reports on this meeting, see HA 71/1537 and 72/1542.

33. See Kuntze Memorandum, HA 71/1537.

34. Walter Burckhard to HJ Reichsleitung in Plauen, Dec. 8, 1930, HA 75/1555 and 71/1537.

35. See undated memorandum of Albert Bormann, HJ Gauführer of Thuringia, “Schulerbund und Hitlerjugend,” HA 75/1555.

36. Rüger to Bormann, Dec. 18, 1930, HA 75/1555.

37. Renteln, “Richtlinien fur die Gründung und die Arbeit einer N.S. Schülerbundortsgruppe,” Jan. 10, 1931, HA 71/1537.

38. See Hallerstein to Reichsleitung HJ, May 15, 1931, HA 75/1555. See also Klein's reply of June 4, 1931, declaring that the HJ viewed the establishment of NSS groups with hostility because it was a “Bund” like that of the bündische Jugend with which he could not cooperate.

39. For evidence of other altercations, see Ernst Müller to HJ Gauleiter of Hanover, Hartmann Lauterbacher, June 4, 1931, HA 75/1555 and 71/1537.

40. Schneider to Reichsleitung HJ, July 7, 1931, HA 75/1555.

41. See for this the documentation contained in the Munich Police Report of Feb. 10, 1932, HA 71/1537.

42. Munich Police reports of Feb. 19 and June 1, 1932, HA 71/1537.

43. Kuntze's “Der Nationalsozialismus und die Schule,” HA 71/1537 and 14A/1542.

44. Ibid. Also see for a discussion of this as it pertains to the NSDAP, Kater, p. 37.

45. Munich Police Report, Feb. 10, 1932, HA 71/1537.

46. See Keppel's autobiography as well as his Oct. 15,1932 “Schulung und Propaganda des Nationalsozialistischen Schülerbund,” HA 18/344 and 346.

47. For samples of such appeals, see HA 18/344, 346.

48. Dr. Bodensteiner to Bavarian Ministry of Education, Sept. 17, 1932, HA 71/1537.

49. See NSSi essay, “Die besonderen Aufgaben des NSSi,” June 22, 1932. For the conflict between the two girls’ organizations, see the Sept. 23, 1931, memorandum of Annalies Mann, head of the Saxon NSSi, to Gregor Strasser, in National Archives, Captured German Documents, Series T-580, Roll 43, Ordner 251. Hereafter cited in abbreviated form: NA T-580/43/251.

50. Körzinger to Gruber, July 7, 1931, HA 75/1555.

51. See the report of Camprecht, NSS Gauführer of Danzig, to Renteln, July 19,1931, HA 75/1555.

52. See “Bestand des Nationalsozialistischen Schülerbundes von 1.12.1930 bis 31.12. 1931” and “Jahresbericht des NSS vom 1.1.32 bis 31.12.32” in HA 18/344. These list twelve NSS Gebiete with the following membership figures:

The discovery and dissolution of the Munich NSS by the police in February 1932 is responsible for the decline from 135 members to 86 at the end of the year.

53. Stachura, pp. 136–38; Brandenburg, pp. 42–45 and 252–55.

54. For the text, see Kommandobrücke, Aug. 25, 1931, in NA T-580/38/239 and HA 18/342 and 19/364.

55. See Renteln's “Jahresbericht der Hitlerjugend für die Zeit von 1. Januar bis zum 31. Dezember 1931,” HA 75/1555.

56. See Mitteilungen des Landeskriminalpolizeiamtes Berlin, May 1 and Sept. 15, 1931, HA 72/1544 and NA T-175/392/2912/061f., as well as Elmar Warning's “Bericht über den Stand der Organisation der Berliner Hitlerjugend,” Jan. 12, 1932, HA 19/362.

57. Renteln, “Jahresbericht der Hitlerjugend,” HA 75/1555.

58. Reichsrundschreiben der HJ 3/31, Dec. 15, 1931, HA 71/1537.

59. Stachura, p. 155.

60. Ibid., pp. 166 and 60. Stachura maintains that the HJ leadership had always been predominantly bourgeois and that there was no major change after Gruber's dismissal. However, he contradicts that argument when he states: “Moreover, most of the working-class leaders had ceased by 1931 to hold high-ranking offices; only Axmann and the two Stegemann brothers in Berlin-Brandenburg retained top posts after 1931,” and then declares, “if the HJ had not been brought under more concentrated bourgeois leadership after 1931 by von Schirach, it is conceivable that in due course a growing number of ordinary working class HJ members would have become leaders.”

61. See Rundschreiben Gebietsführer Nordwest, Dec. 15, 1931, HA 75/1555.

62. See Völkischer Beobachter, Jan. 13, 1932, HA 71/1541; Reichsführer HJ to all Gebiets- and Gauführer, Apr. 15, 1932, HA 75/1555. Kayser was replaced by Hartmann Lauterbacher, a safe and obedient young druggist, who eventually became Chief of Staff in the Reichsjugendführung under Schirach.

63. See Münchner Post, Apr. 12, 1932, HA 72/1544.

64. Stachura, pp. 83–84.

65. Auszug aus dem Halbmonatsbericht der Polizeidirektion Augsburg 2/32, Feb. 1, 1932, HA 72/1544.

66. For Klein's dismissal, see Völkischer Beobachter, Sept. 18/19, 1932, HA 71/1540, but see also Munich police reports of Sept. 4 and Oct. 20, 1932, in Bayerisches Hauptstaatsarchiv Munich, Abteilung I, Minn 71799.

67. See Klein's article in Die Front, Feb. 13, 1932, HA 71/1541.

68. Munich Police Report of Sept. 15, 1932, Bayerisches Hauptstaatsarchiv Munich, Abteilung I, Minn 71799 and HA 71/1541 and 1542.

69. See Keppel's “Jahresbericht des nationalsozialistischen Schülerbundes in der Hitlerjugend vom 1.1.1932 bis 31.12.1932,” HA 18/344.

70. Brandenburg, pp. 120f, and Stachura, pp. 160ff.

71. See Keppel's “Jahresbericht,” HA 18/344.

72. Der junge Sturmtrupp, Nr. 13, July 1932, HA 71/1541.

73. See Schirach's “Verfugung des Reichsjugendführers der NSDAP betreffend die Neuorganisation des NSS,” HA 18/344.

74. In Sept. 1932 there were 9,447 passive members and only 2,696 active ones. By Dec. the number of passive members was 9,677 while the number of active ones had risen to 4,109. See for this, Keppel's “Jahresbericht,” HA 18/344.

75. See Vorschriftenhandbuch der Hitlerjugend, Vol. III, pp. 1077f., in NA T-81/678/4, 715, 975–76.