Historians, in their somewhat defensive perusal of sociology for sweeping theoretical statements, perhaps underestimate the careful, often narrow, empiricism of much sociological research. Sociologists unearth facts for subsequent historians to work on and sometimes to interpret more broadly. Historical sociologists to the contrary, fact-grubbing services are mutual in the two disciplines. German sociologists were the first to study the social effects of industrialization extensively. By the early twentieth century, when masses of workers were still entering factory industry for the first time, sociologists were ready to investigate the process of adaptation through systematic interviews. British researchers in the same period, besides being dedicated amateurs for the most part, focused on the urban poor and on material conditions too exclusively still. French efforts were even more scattered. Maurice Halbwachs did some valuable studies of consumption patterns, while Le Play and his school contributed rather conservative portraits of individual workers. For purposes of understanding the working class in manufacturing, German sociological research was long unrivaled.

Theodor Mommsen called him “the most German man.” The Israelit noted that he had never stepped forward as a Jew. Ernest Hamburger writes that he was the only Jewish deputy who omitted the usual declaration about his religious allegiance in the parliamentary manual. “It was without significance for him.” In his will he requested that “no religious ceremony take place since this is absolutely contrary to my conviction.” And even after his death, when his brother Rudolf established a fund of ten thousand marks for the Berlin Jewish community, it was specified that books could be distributed to talented children except those who attended religious schools. Thus we have a picture of Ludwig Bamberger, the most German man or at least a completely emancipated Jew.

Although Hitler placed primary emphasis in his propaganda on the “spoken word,” one of his earliest ambitions as a party leader was to own a newspaper. He succeeded in December 1920, little more than a year after he joined the Nazi Party, by purchasing a debt-ridden newspaper, the Völkischer Beobachter. It had started life in 1887 as the Münchener Beobachter, a local paper serving the Munich suburb of Haidhausen. After changing names and owners several times, the paper in 1918 came into the hands of Rudolf von Sebottendorff, who was acting for the Thule Society, a right-wing, völkisch group. Early in 1920, he changed the name to Völkischer Beobachter (VB).