Between 1933 and 1939, there a social

revolution in Germany. How far do you agree

with this statement? (30)
When the Nazis came into power in 1933, many of their promises
suggested that a social transformation would take place under their
regime. In particular, they promised to end the misery and suffering of all
racially pure working people. Likewise, enormous changes to the lives of
the young (next generation) and women (a traditional role) were also
emphasised. Some historians have argued that the Nazi dictatorship did
dislocate the existing class structure and ignite fundamental social change
which can be described as revolutionary. Nevertheless, in defining the
term social revolution, it cannot be concluded that Germany (between
1933 and 1939) saw the reorganization of the industrial, economic life of
the country together with the entire structure of society. Yes changes did
occur but many of these were short lived and indeed contradicting
(especially in the relation to women). Moreover, Hitlers aim to create a
classless community never prevailed as his inherent need for big
business ensured that the division between rich and poor remained much
the same.
In relation to the working classes, it could be argued that a social
revolution took place. The dissolution of both the KDP (February 1933) and
SDP (June 1933) as well as the abolishment of free trade unions thrust all
of the working classes into the German Labour Front (DAF). In addition, to
win the allegiance of people, the Nazis established huge state
organisations to protect and cultivate workers. Strength through Joy (KdF)
offered education, sport, cultural events and state financed holidays and
by 1938 one third of the workforce had taken part in subsidised vacations.
Moreover, under the Beauty of Labour Scheme, there were improved
working conditions in factories thus suggesting radical change. Although
on the surface these were only cosmetic changes, evidence would suggest
that they were popular and did much to raise the status of a workforce
which had traditionally been alienated from the state. However, the
overall picture of the experience of the working classes is mixed thus
making it difficult to analyse if a social revolution did occur. What does
seem certain though is that large sections of the working class were either
converted or reconciled to the dictatorship thus giving the impression that
the industrial working classes did undertake a revolution between 1933
and 1939.
Nevertheless, even though the lives of workers changed significantly thus
suggesting huge transformation, did Hitler really achieve the classless
community that would really define the changes as revolutionary? Deeper
analysis of this factor would highlight that it did not create a social
revolution amongst workers. For example, the purging of the radical Nazi
factions that championed the idea of social revolution were brutally
eliminated by the leadership during the purge of the SA in 1934. Indeed,
Hitlers drive for stability, economic recovery and rearmament required an
alliance with big business and the emasculation (limiting of powers) of the
working classes. Even if state interference did lead to a kind of cosmetic
egalitarianism as managers were encouraged to eat with their workers,
this certainly does not constitute 'revolution'. Moreover, for many workers
living standards declined significantly during the Third Reich as wages
were frozen and prices of goods continued to rise. The working week rose
from 44 hours in 1933 to over 50 hours by the end of the decade thus
suggesting that a hierarchy existed as business owners continued to profit
from the exploitation of the industrial workers thereby highlighting that a
social revolution for workers had not taken place by 1939. Ultimately,
Nazism served only to reinforce existing social divisions and there was
certainly there was no real distribution of wealth or purging of the old
elites as in Bolshevik Russia.
So, if the industrial working classes failed to undergo a social revolution,
how did the lower middle classes (Mittelstand) fair? Initially, many were
hopeful of radical change as their infinity with the Nazis (identified most
closely to Nazi ideology) certainly suggested that their fortunes would
benefit under the Third Reich. Indeed, initially, the lower middle classes
had much to celebrate as a result of the Nazi seizure of power. The
communist threat (state ownership of all businesses) was destroyed thus
meaning that their wealth and businesses was not in jeopardy. More
significantly, as Hitler had promised, he banned the establishment of new
department stores, halved the number of co-operatives and curbed
competition in the craft trade by introducing guild regulations thus
allowing the Mittelstand the chance to prosper. The Mittelstand also
benefited from the destruction of free trade unions, the imposition of
wage controls and low interest loans thereby suggesting that there was
major changes in the lives of this group. Nevertheless, deeper analysis
would highlight that although there were positive measures, they were not
significant enough to be deemed a revolution. For example, the living
conditions of the Mittelstand did not significantly improve during the
1930s and even though the opening of new department stores was
banned, the existing ones continued to exist thus ensuring that many
people shopped at these establishments (lower prices) than in the
independent shops (owned by the Mittelstand). Just as importantly, not
only were small scale traders out priced by department stores, but
they were squeezed by the Reich Food Estate, which controlled prices of
many items thus ensuring profit margins were low. Indeed, the number of
small businesses which collapsed increased significantly. Even the small
traders who survived tended to work long hours for diminishing returns
and even though they remained loyal to the Nazis, many of them were
disappointed by the lack of real economic gains thereby confirming that a
social revolution for this group did not occur.
In the rural areas, where support for the Nazis had been increasing since
the late 1920s, there was also hope that their support for Hitler and his
party would revolutionise their lives. Indeed, the fact that Hitler exploited
rural bitterness and poverty with a powerful emotional appeal to Blood
and Soil and a glorification of the patriotism, dignity and racial purity of
rural Germany certainly suggests that once in power, the rural class would
be granted significant reforms. Add to this the fact that the Nazis believed
that in rural Germany lay the life spring of a racial purity untainted by the
interbreeding, degeneracy and physical squalor of urban German coupled
with his desire to make Germany self-sufficient certainly highlights Nazi
intentions to radically change the lives of the farmers who had been so
badly exploited by the Weimar republic. Indeed, once in power, the Nazis
via the Reich Entailed farm Law (1933) not only were farmers offered
financial incentives to stay on the land, but it was declared that farms of
over 30 acres would be hereditary thus ensuring they stayed in the
hands of the family regardless of the economic climate. In addition, many
were exempt from insurance payments, interest on mortgages was
reduced and farmers could also claim generous family allowances, grants
for improvements and credit for house purchases thus suggesting that
rural Germany went through a social revolution during the years 1933 to
1939. However, as with the industrial workers and the Mittelstand,
significant drawbacks remained for the rural class thus highlighting they
did not undergo a social revolution. In particular, the regulation of
agriculture through the Reich Food Estate led to fixed agricultural quotas
and dictated crop production thus stifling their chances to make real
economic gains. Moreover, each farm was supervised by bureaucrats who
vigorously enforced petty and inflexible rules which not only alienated
rural workers but also highlighted that a system of class prevailed.
Ultimately, the micro management of the government may have been
acceptable if profits had increased but by 1937 farm incomes had
stagnated and fell thereafter as labour costs rose and process were fixed.
The drive for rearmament after 1936 widened the gap between rural and
industrial workers and inevitably the regimes idea of Blood and Soil was
sacrificed to meet the demands of war which only a modernised industrial
society could satisfy thus arguing that a social revolution for rural
Germany had not occurred by 1939.
One area of society where huge initial changes took place was in
regards to women. In particular, the Nazis championed traditional
volkisch ideas about the role of the woman, as subservient wife
and prolific mother. She was to be the guardian of moral virtue,
domestic harmony and the life spring of racial purity thereby
suggesting that women under Nazism would undertake a social
revolution. Indeed, Nazi ideas became sloganized into the so
called Three Ks Children, Kitchen, Church. As soon as in power
the regime set about transforming the lives of women by
reducing the number involved in employment. Women were
excluded from the civil service, judiciary and medicine and their
entry into university education was severely restricted. Moreover,
interest free loans were offered to newly married women as
inducement to not seek employment. The fact that there was a
decline in female employment (37% to 31% between 1933 and
1937) supports the statement that women underwent a
revolution through these years. The Nazi regime attempted not
only to encourage more births (contraceptive and abortion was
outlawed) but to create a breed of healthy, racially pure Aryans
who would dominate the Thousand Year Reich. The Nuremburg
Laws of 1935 banned sexual intercourse between Germans and
Jews; marriage was outlawed for those suffering from 'hereditary
disease'; and compulsory sterilisation was introduced for
'defectives'. In the Lebensborn programme Aryan women were
impregnated by members of the SS and medals were awarded for
having numerous children. Nazi propaganda promoted a
stereotypical image of pure Aryan maidens, submissive, innocent
and fertile. All in all, the wide ranging changes to women's lives
certainly suggested a revolution took place and aside from these,
their role in society, although vastly different to men, was seen as
just as important.
Nevertheless, despite the significant changes, further evidence
would argue that even though the lives of women changed
initially, by 1939, they were very much back to where they
started thus highlighting that even though a social revolution
may have initially taken place for women, it did not last for long.
For example, once Germany had reached full employment(1938),
the number of working women increased by 25%. Just as
significantly, Nazi measures for increasing marriages and the
number of births were not particularly successful and just as
importantly, it can be put down to the increasing prosperity of
the country more than Nazi policies (people more likely to have
children during times of affluence).Indeed, even more damming
was that after 1938, the birth rate stagnated thus highlighting
that any revolution to significantly transform the lives of women
(and in particular create a new Aryan society) had quickly been
stopped in its tracks.
Another area of Nazi Germany which is usually perceived as going
through a social revolution was that of the young people.
Employment prospects improved significantly and there was a
good mood of optimism and national self-confidence especially
when compared to the Depression and humiliation for the 1920s.
Moreover, the Hitler Youth gave them a sense of comradeship,
travel and adventure which saw many wearing their uniform with
pride thus suggesting a huge transformation in the lives of young
people under the Nazi regime. The fact that rich and poor children
mixed emphasised Hitlers ambition of everyone working together
for the good of Germany regardless of class. However, further
analysis would undermine this notion and although it could be
argued that social revolution amongst the youth did take place, it
was only short lived and never fully achieved. In particular, Adolf
Hitler Schools (the highest of all the schools for boys) were filled
with members of the elites thus suggesting class barriers had not
diminished. Likewise, although rich and poor were alongside each
other in Hitler Youth Camps, there is much evidence to suggest
that rich kids socialised with rich kids and not those from lower
classes thus highlighting that Hitlers hope for a classless society
again had not been achieved. Moreover, by 1939 disillusionment
had set in amongst many members of the Hitler Youth mainly due
to the increased regimentation that was implemented as part of
the Nazis drive towards rearmament. This disillusionment
immersed itself in increasing rates of delinquency (drinking and
smoking increased) thus highlighting that Hitler had not achieved
his aims of producing a healthy, loyal and well-disciplined youth
movement. Most damming of all though was the number of
opposition groups begun to spring up at the end of the 1930s
such as the Edelweiss Pirates and Swing Youth, all of which
refused to be taken in by Nazi ideals. Even if a majority of youth
still remained mesmerised by the dictatorship (as could be seen
by their heroic resistance in the last days of the war), the success
of transformation for the youth was not enough to be considered
a revolution.
Probably the biggest change in relation to a social revolution was in
relation to the old ruling classes. While the Nazis glorified peasant farmers
for their robust patriotism and racial purity, the regime had nothing but
contempt for the aristocracy who were perceived to be effete (weak /
effeminate), internationalist and unpatriotic. Party radicals argued that a
real peoples community could only be created if the aristocracy lost their
status and privilege. Indeed, promotion of clever, aspiring members of the
upper working class and lower middle class within the Party, the
bureaucracy and the army was a key agent of social mobility which
undermined the influence of the traditional elites within society. Likewise,
recruitment to and promotion within the Party, the SS and the Hitler Youth
increased significantly from the lower and middle classes thus laying
credence to the claim that social revolution was occurring. Just as
significantly, dominance of aristocracy was drastically reduced within the
armed force. For example, in 1920, sixty one percent of generals were
drawn from the aristocracy and this had reduced to twenty five percent by
1936. Furthermore, by the outbreak of war (1939), 140 of 166 generals
were from middle class origins thus highlighting the significant social
mobility that took place in Germany (1933 -39). Therefore, the
disintegration of the old ruling class in Germany and the emergence of
meritocracy certainly highlights that social revolution was beginning to
take place within this area of society but had certainly not yet been
fulfilled.
In conclusion, despite Hitler's grandiose claims to have broken down
classes to make way for the German people as a whole many historians do
not accept a social revolution took place during the Third Reich. Although
there were signs of changes (especially within the army and the Nazi
Party), the old class system was too deeply entrenched, existing sectarian
loyalties were too robust, and the regime was too short lived to engineer
any significant social reconstruction. The radical Nazis like Rohm and
Strasser who were committed to the full blown social revolution were
eliminated in 1934 so that Hitler could consolidate his alliance with the
traditional elites. Indeed, Left - Wing historians argue that by favouring
big business and emasculating the working classes, far from achieving a
classless community, Nazism served only to reinforce existing social
divisions. Certainly there was no real distribution of wealth or purging of
the old elite as occurred in Bolshevik Russia. Moreover, despite romantic
appeals to the Mittelstand and the peasant farmer, the drive for
rearmament and self sufficiency along with the impact of war tended to
favour big business at the expense of the craft workers and encouraged
more rapid urbanisation. Women and young people encountered radical
changes but in regards to the former, Nazi policies were contradicting and
in relation to the latter, many had become disillusioned by 1939.
Therefore, all in all, there were changes across all social classes and
individually certain aspects may have seemed revolutionary but overall,
this did not constitute a social revolution as the statement suggests.