Beyond Victims and Perpetrators: The
Complexity of National Socialist
Fanaticism in German Children and their
Life-long Struggle with Guilt
Brigitte Eubank
Research Paper
History 6020: Research Methods
13 December 2011
1
Assessing culpability of German youth during the Third Reich is rather complicated. In
the historiography of the Hitler Youth, the following question frequently, though indirectly,
appears: “Were the Hitler Youth victims or perpetrators?” Some scholars view the Hitler Youth
as victims of Hitler’s regime. They argue that Nazi leaders, whose sole concern was the training
of the next generation of genocidal killers, took advantage of German children. Other scholars
view the Hitler Youth as perpetrators of Nazi crimes. They argue that, even though they were
children, the Hitler Youth still played an important role in maintaining the Nazi system. It could
also be argued that the Hitler Youth were both victims and perpetrators. In this paper, I do not
want to take a stance on the victim versus perpetrator argument; rather, I simply want to point
out that the issue is not as clear-cut as one might think. An examination of the various factors
that produced National Socialist fanaticism reveals that it is far too complicated to collectively
classify the youth as victims or perpetrators. Each youth had an entirely unique experience
because of differences in his or her indoctrination, education, and family background.
Surprisingly, very few secondary works have been published (in English) about the Hitler
Youth. The three most notable works on the subject are H.W. Koch’s The Hitler Youth: Origins
and Development 1922-1945(1975), Gerhard Rempel’s Hitler’s Children: The Hitler Youth and
the SS (1989), and Michael Kater’s Hitler Youth (2004). Each author provides an overview of the
Hitler Youth organization, exploring topics such as the organization’s origins, the activities and
training youth participated in, resistance against the organization, education during the Third
Reich, and the role of girls. Although their books are primarily narrative histories, each author
takes a clear stance on the victim versus perpetrator argument.
H.W. Koch wrote the first major book on the Hitler Youth. He simply aimed to provide a
narrative history of the Hitler Youth organization. However, he points out that because of the
2
lack of sources at the time, it would be impossible for him to “[supply] a definitive history.”1
Although his book is a narrative, Koch takes a clear stance in regard to the victim versus
perpetrator argument, referring to the Hitler Youth as “youth in bondage.”2 He also suggests that
Hitler Youths did not have an ideology, but instead likely had only “patriotic ardour and a vague
notion of ‘German socialism.’”3 He references the following quote by a former Hitler Youth:
“We weren’t fully conscious of what we were doing, but we enjoyed ourselves and also felt
important.”4 Koch claims that the previous testimony was most likely representative of most
Hitler Youth.5
Gerhard Rempel focuses more on the administrative and organizational structure of the
Hitler Youth. He argues that “In order to break down social and religious barriers of hindering
the establishment of a ‘national community,’ a combination of terror (by the SS) and
indoctrination (of the HJ) was thought to be necessary.”6 Rempel, like Koch, sees the Hitler
Youth as victims. He refers to the Hitler Youth as “a generation of misguided idealists.”7 He
explains, “Hitler’s children demonstrated a youthful capacity for fidelity. That loyalty was
abused. In the name of perverted ideals, the SS exploited and misled millions of them. They were
betrayed, deserted, and sacrificed by a party and a regime that had used them to attain power.”8
Unfortunately, he does not discuss this argument in depth.
1
H.W. Koch, The Hitler Youth: Origins and Development 1922-45 (New York: Stein and Day,
1975), VII.
2
Ibid.
3
Ibid., 94.
4
Ibid.
5
Ibid.
6
Gerhard Rempel, Hitler’s Children: The Hitler Youth and the SS (Chapel Hill: The University of
North Carolina Press, 1989), 8.
7
Rempel, 262.
8
Ibid.
3
Michael Kater is the only historian who examines questions regarding the complicity
(involvement) and culpability (guilt) of the Hitler Youth. Kater disagrees with Koch and Rempel
in their view that the Hitler Youth are innocent victims. Instead, he contends that the Hitler
Youth were complicit in aiding the Third Reich. His thesis for Hitler Youth is that, voluntary or
forced, all Hitler Youth members were complicit in their actions during the Third Reich. He
argues, “Even if they were merely small cogs in the huge war machinery…they had become a
part of those systems, helping to guarantee their terrible functionality.”9 Although he does not
examine guilt in detail, Kater makes the following argument concerning how to judge culpability
of the Hitler Youth: “The degree of guilt that any Hitler Youth possessed… depended on their
age, their hierarchical position in Nazi governance, and, ultimately, on the sum total of activities
of a criminal nature they became engaged in.”10
While I do agree that all of the factors Kater mentions are important, I do not think they
are inclusive enough. Kater seems to be referring to the culpability of members actively involved
in the Hitler Youth (Hitlerjugend) or HJ, with an emphasis on males and the military aspect of
the Hitler Youth. However, the memoirs of German youth show that one did not have to be
active in the Hitler Youth or fanatical about National Socialist ideology to confront the question
of guilt in the postwar years. Simply living through the Third Reich as a German child was
enough to result in a personal, long-lasting struggle with guilt. As Ursula Mahlendorf explains,
“No amount of conscious knowledge that you cannot be responsible for what you experience as a
child, no attempt at dismantling this guilt, erases the shame and the grief.”11
9
Michael H. Kater, Hitler Youth, (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2004), 262.
Ibid.
11
Ursula Mahlendorf, The Shame of Survival: Working Through a Nazi Childhood (Pennsylvania:
Pennsylvania State University Press, 2009), 27.
10
4
In order to evaluate the question of culpability more broadly (that is, to include the
culpability of all non-Jewish German youth), I think it is necessary to focus on two elements:
ideology and postwar reflections. First, in order to truly understand ideology, one should study
the various factors that produced or, conversely, failed to produce, fanaticism for National
Socialist ideology in German youths. In other words, what factors caused a child to become a
proud, active Nazi? What factors caused a child to be wary of the Nazi party? According to my
analysis of several memoirs, the three predominant factors that all youths were exposed to were
indoctrination by the Nazi party, education, and one’s parents. Second, one should consider the
youths’ point-of-view regarding guilt because their reflections show further evidence of the
complexity of the issue.
Despite the lack of secondary sources, several primary sources are available in English. I
have primarily consulted memoirs. I have studied fourteen memoirs in total.12 Memoirs require
caution. In general, they lack credibility in that they usually are not based on research but instead
are based primarily upon memories. Memories are subjective and tend to fade over time. With
this topic, two important points should be made. First, these authors were children during the
Third Reich. In most cases, they did not write their memoirs until many years, often decades,
after the war. Although the authors gained more time to reflect upon their childhoods, the added
time might have altered their initial feelings or weakened their memories. Second, the Holocaust
12
Wilhelm R. Gehlen’s Jungvolk: The Story of a Boy Defending Hitler’s Third Reich (2008), Alfons Heck’s A Child of
Hitler: Germany in the Days When God Wore a Swastika (1985), Jost Hermand’s A Hitler Youth in Poland (1993),
Irmgard Hunt’s On Hitler’s Mountain: Overcoming the Legacy of a Nazi Childhood (2005), Thea Johnson’s The Hitler
I Knew: A Young Girl’s Memoirs of WWII in Germany (2006), Horst Krueger’s A Crack in the Wall: Growing up Under
Hitler (1982), Ursula Mahlendorf’s The Shame of Survival: Working Through a Nazi Childhood (2009), Bruno Manz’
Mind in Prison: The Memoir of a Son and Soldier of the Third Reich (2000), Melita Maschmann’s Account Rendered:
A Dossier on my Former Self (1964), Gisela McBride’s Through My Eyes: Memoirs of Hitler’s Berlin (2006), Henry
Metelmann’s A Hitler Youth: Growing Up in Germany in the 1930s (1997), Hermann Pfrengle’s Forget That You
Have Been Hitler Soldiers: A Youth’s Service to the Reich (2001), Willy Schumann’s Being Present: Growing Up in
Hitler’s Germany (1991), and Eycke Strickland’s Eyes are Watching, Ears are Listening: Growing Up in Nazi
Germany 1933-46 (2008).
5
is an extremely sensitive, emotion-laden topic. Nonetheless, I thought that most authors were
seemingly open and honest with their feelings and biases.
To achieve a balanced view, I selected a representative sampling of memoirs both in
terms of gender and age, as well as extent of participation in the Hitler Youth. Of a total of
fourteen, eight were written by females, while six were written by males. Each author’s age in
1945 was as follows:
Eycke Strickland
11
Willy Schumann
18
Irmgard Hunt
11
Gisela McBride
20
Wilhelm Gehlen
12
Henry Metelmann
22
Jost Hermand
15
Bruno Manz
24
Ursula Mahlendorf
16
Horst Krueger
25
Hermann Pfrengle
16
Melita Maschmann
27
Alfons Heck
17
The two youngest were not yet born in 1933, the year of Hitler’s ascent to power and, as such,
spent their entire youth growing up under the Third Reich. The oldest, Melita Maschmann, was
only 15 when Hitler came to power. All of the authors had varying degrees of participation
within the Hitler Youth organization, from serving as leaders (Maschmann, Heck) to not having
much, if any, HJ experience (Strickland, Hunt). All authors except Wilhelm Gehlen discuss the
issue of guilt.
The first element that all German children were exposed to was indoctrination by the
National Socialist party. Media and surrounding culture also fall under this category, as both
were heavily under the influence of the Nazi party. Horst Krueger claims that it is a “horrifying
6
confirmation” that “man is the product of his environment. In the city of death, everyone
becomes a supporting player.”13 Indoctrination was practically unavoidable. In German society
during the Third Reich, the vast majority of citizens simply went along with Hitler. Resistance
was not the norm. Hitler was glorified in all facets of society, such as newspapers, radio,
speeches, and parades.
It is impossible to understand the mindset of German youths without examining the
propaganda they confronted on a daily basis. The Nazi Primer: Official Handbook for Schooling
the Hitler Youth is an excellent example of the typical content found in publications of National
Socialist propaganda. Topics addressed in the Nazi Primer include the “racial composition” of
the so-called Aryan race, Mendelian Laws and genetics, the stress upon the German economy
due to inheritable diseases, and the importance of land, food, and population for the German
people. Propaganda claimed that Jews were an inferior race and that Germans were the superior
race, destined to prosper. The major concept was “race and space.” For Germany to become
stronger, its people had to become a strong race (free of weaker non-Aryan races, especially
Jews, and those with diseases -- both of which were viewed as hereditary), and they had to have
enough space to live and prosper.14 Thus, as historian Gilmer Blackburn argues, in order to
restore previous territory and to conquer new land, German youth were taught that war was “a
normal condition in a life of struggle.” 15 Moreover, in Nazi ideology, death was encouraged:
13
Ibid.
Fritz Brennecke, The Nazi Primer: Official Handbook for Schooling the Hitler Youth, Translated
by Harwood L. Childs (New York: Harper and Brothers Publishers, 1938).
15
Gilmer W. Blackburn, Education in the Third Reich: Race and History in Nazi Textbooks
(Albany: State University of New York Press, 1985), 12.
14
7
“Death…was nevertheless glorified in order to stir adolescents to emulate willingly the heroic
sacrifice.”16
The influence of indoctrination has been debated and largely dismissed in the secondary
literature. Koch refers to official Hitler Youth publications as “dull” and argues that the youths
viewed the publications as “clumsy propaganda.”17 However, some youths believed that such
propaganda was the truth. For instance, Bruno Manz claims that “[propaganda films] were quite
effective,” and that “…they strengthened my belief in the superiority of the Aryan race.”18
Scholars also dismiss the influence of education during the Third Reich. However, I think that
the influence of indoctrination and education were more significant than historians have
suggested. Clearly the youths struggled with re-education in the postwar years; that was because
they received a faulty foundation in their formative years via indoctrination and education.
The primary mechanism for instilling National Socialist ideology in German youth was
the Hitler Youth organization. The Hitler Youth was divided into four sections: Hitler Youth
(Hitler Jugend - HJ) (boys ages 14 to 18), League of German Girls (Bund Deutscher Maedel BDM) (girls ages 14-18), Young German Boys (Jungfolk - DJ) (boys ages 10 to 14), and the
Young German Girls (Jungmaedel - JM) (girls ages 10 to 14). The government slowly weeded
out all other youth organizations, and membership in the Hitler Youth became compulsory by
law in March of 1939. Baldur von Schirach served as the National Leader for the Hitler Youth;
his successor was Artur Axmann (August 1940-1945). Both National Leaders were in their mid-
16
Blackburn, 128.
Koch, 132.
18
Bruno Manz, Mind in Prison: The Memoir of a Son and Soldier of the Third Reich (Washington:
Brassey’s, 2000), 75.
17
8
thirties when appointed. At the local level, the youth were led by other youths – who were
usually just a couple years older than those they were leading.
Even before membership in the Hitler Youth became mandatory, many German youths
wanted – by choice – to join the organization. By far, the most important reason that young
people joined the HJ was the desire for inclusion. Kater claims, “…one can understand young
people’s attraction to spiffy uniforms and to the paraphernalia of premilitary drill, such as air
guns. Similarly, it is not hard to understand the appeal and satisfaction of belonging to a large,
dominant, and protective community and participating in their communal singing, marching, and
camping.”19 For instance, Irmgard Hunt explains, “…how could I tolerate it if all my friends
were strutting around in their uniforms every Friday afternoon and I was left out?”20 Similarly,
Thea Johnson states, “I was so proud to wear my uniform. I looked forward to the meetings
where we would learn how to do handicrafts, make little things out of wood to give children for
Christmas presents, and learn about our leader, Adolf Hitler.”21 Nearly all of the memoir authors
mention the desire for belonging and the excitement of belonging to such a popular group.
Even for those youth who supported the Nazi cause, it is clear that, for the most part, they
had no grasp of the reality of Nazi ideology. Alfons Heck, who supported the Nazi cause, claims,
“To us in the Hitler Youth, the ‘Final Solution’ meant deportation, but not annihilation.”22 Jost
Hermand, who despised his experiences in the Hitler Youth, claims he listened to songs that
featured topics such as “fighting, willingness to sacrifice, duty, and death for the fatherland, but
19
Kater, 3-4.
Irmgard A. Hunt, On Hitler’s Mountain: Overcoming the Legacy of a Nazi Childhood (New
York: HarperCollins Publishers Inc., 2005), 171.
21
Thea Johnson, The Hitler I Knew: A Young Girl’s Memoirs of WWII in Germany (Bloomington,
IN: AuthorHouse, 2006), 5.
22
Alfons Heck, A Child of Hitler: Germany in the Days When God Wore a Swastika (Frederick, CO: Renaissance
House), 50.
20
9
neither the camp squad leader nor the army officers explained to us the real ideological goals
behind these emotional demands for our devotion.”23 Ursula Mahlendorf maintains that, prior to
Kristallnacht, she did not have a “clear conception of who or what Jews were, or even curiosity
about them.”24 Similarly, Hermann Pfrengle states, “The ‘enemy’ – this was still an elusive, and
confusing concept to me.”25 As a last example, Willy Schumann maintains, “’Jews’ and “Jewry’
were rather nebulous terms for us as DJ members.”26
Not surprisingly, some students did not even realize they were being indoctrinated. The
youth were too caught up in an atmosphere of community and festivity to understand the actual
purpose of the Hitler Youth. For example, Jost Hermand claims, “…our Nazi indoctrination was
limited or carried out in such a way that we did not even perceive it as such.”27 A former BDM
member expressed the same sentiment, remarking, “Maybe there, sure there definitely was
something political too in the [Hitler Youth], but we didn’t see it that way.”28 She instead only
remembers “games, that kind of activity, all the stuff we did, playing around.”29
Aside from the desire for inclusion, most German youth supported the Hitler Youth
solely out of feelings of patriotism. As Koch suggests, they merely possessed “patriotic ardour
23
Jost Hermand, A Hitler Youth in Poland: The Nazis’ Program for Evacuating Children During
World War II, Translated by Margot Bettauer (Evanston, Illinois: Northwestern University Press), Originally
published as Als Pimpf in Polen: Erweiterte Kinderlandverschickung, 1940-1945 (Frankfurt am Main, Fischer
Taschenbuch Verlag, 1993), 46.
24
Mahlendorf, 60.
25
Hermann O Pfrengle and Wilbur D. Jones, Jr., Forget That You Have Been Hitler Soldiers: A
Youth’s Service to the Reich (Shippensburg, PA: Burd Street Press, 2001), 9.
26
Willy Schumann, Being Present: Growing Up in Hitler’s Germany (Kent, OH: Kent State
University Press, 1991), 27.
27
Hermand, 22.
28
Dagmar Reese, Growing Up Female in Nazi Germany, Translated by William Templer (Ann
Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2006), Originally published as “Straff, aber nicht stramm- Herb, aber nicht
derb”: Zur Vergesellschaftung von Maedchen durch den Bund Deutscher Maedel im sozialkulturellen Vergleich
zweier Milieus. (Germany: Weinheim and Basel, 1989), 144.
29
Ibid.
10
and a vague notion of ‘German socialism.’”30 For instance, Manz states, “And patriotism was a
cause close to my heart. The nation, the flat, soldiery, sacrifice on the altar of the Fatherland,
these were the ideals I nurtured in my childish mind.”31 He points out that he “adopted” these
views from his father and his teachers.32 Maschmann argues, “What first drew young people to
National Socialism was not hatred – of ‘enemy’ tendencies or foreigners – but love of
Germany.”33 Schumann recalls having a “positive attitude toward everything military” and a
fascination with Soldatentum (soldiership).34 On reflection of her Third Reich youth, Hunt
maintains, “Patriotism, that misused word that I began to hate, became the excuse for almost
everything that had transpired.”35
A second element that affected a youth’s extent of fanaticism was the type of education
he or she received. Often times, it was hard to distinguish education from indoctrination during
the Third Reich. For instance, if a student had a devout Nazi teacher, the coursework was
typically geared more towards Nazi indoctrination. The curriculum taught in schools during the
Third Reich was rather distorted; Teachers taught National Socialistic ideological lies as facts.
Blackburn argues, “The institutionalization of the Fuehrer’s personal hatreds transformed
German schools into demolition agencies charged with extirpating the influence of the various
enemies of National Socialism.”36 The unfortunate result was that, for the most part, students
were deprived of a “real” education in their formative years. In the postwar years, re-education
was often a long and difficult process.
30
Koch, 94.
Manz, 13.
32
Manz, 13.
33
Maschmann, 26.
34
Schumann, 104.
35
Hunt, 239.
36
Blackburn, preface.
31
11
Moreover, teachers generally went along with the Nazi system rather than directly
opposing it. Koch points out that although many teachers “…viewed the pedagogic and
educational attempts of the Hitler Youth with reservation and skepticism,” very rarely did this
sentiment result in any “direct friction.”37 This is likely because teachers had reason to worry
about being reported for challenging Nazi ideology. Ultimately, however, the educational
experience for each youth was unique. Each youth experienced a variety of different teachers in
his or her educational career– from teachers who were devout Nazis, to those who tried to steer
their students in the “right” direction.
Expectedly, some of the youths recalled feeling suppressed by their educational
experiences. Alfons Heck suggests that indoctrination began before entering the Hitler Youth. He
claims that it began “our very first day in the Volksschule, the elementary school. We five- and
six- year- olds received an almost daily dose of nationalistic instruction, which we swallowed as
naturally as our morning milk.”38 As the title of his book A Mind in Prison suggests, Bruno
Manz felt like his mind was in prison during the Third Reich. Similarly, Melita Maschmann
states, “Just when we had reached the stage at which we could have learned to think and acquire
intellectual equipment, the period began when thinking was regarded as a ‘biologically negative’
activity of degenerate brains. We had no education.”39 Metelmann claims, “The all-dominating
influence coming from school and the Hitler Youth swamped all tentative attempts to think
independently and to analyze events unrolling in front of my eyes.”40
37
Koch, 169.
Heck, 2.
39
Maschmann, 79.
40
Metelmann, 173.
38
12
According to the secondary sources, the impact of education upon Hitler Youth – in
terms of indoctrination of ideology– was only minimal. Koch argues that “…the psychological
gains made by the control of youth literature can only have been very limited and in most cases
only temporary.”41 Blackburn agrees, claiming, “The experience in Germany after World War II
suggests that the Nazi educational materials made no permanent imprint upon the minds of most
Germans.”42 He claims that these ideas were “transitory” but not “insignificant.”43 Many of the
memoir authors, however, refer to a long and difficult time in coping with guilt and re-education.
As I mentioned earlier, I think the influence of both indoctrination and education was more
significant than scholars suggest; if this is not the case, then what would account for the
painstaking struggles with re-education?
Lastly, a child’s parents could influence his or her path towards Nazi fanaticism. It would
have been a very different experience for a child to have parents who were devout National
Socialists as opposed to parents who were extremely anti- National Socialist or parents who were
non-political. It appears that most German youths took the side of their parents on the issue;
however, this was not always the case. For instance, Metelmann and Heck both became National
Socialists despite their parents’ attempts to steer them away.
Although children often follow in their parents footsteps, Nazi leaders intentionally
increased the gap between the younger generation and the older generation. Hitler designed the
Hitler Youth organization to appeal to youths, so that they had an organization entirely devoted
to and largely led by the youth themselves. Gilmer Blackburn argues, “Even the party’s
propaganda exploited the generational conflict, portraying the movement’s direction as young,
41
Koch, 161.
Blackburn, 184.
43
Blackburn ,184.
42
13
vibrant, and charged with excitement, in contrast to the old, tired democratic leaders.”44
Historian Dagmar Reese, who interviewed former BDM members from Minden and Wedding,
argues, “[Youths’ self-demarcation] was often directed first against one’s own parents.”45 One of
her interviewees, a former BDM member, states, “’For me, when I look back now and think
about it, membership in the BDM was on a kind of par with going against the wishes of my
parents.’”46 Similarly, Metelmann states that he viewed his father as “politically an old square,
unable to fit into the round hole of understanding the modern ideas brought to us by the genius of
Adolf Hitler.”47 Heck explains that although he did not think his father was “dangerous to our
new order,” he viewed him as “a fool who had long since been left behind.”48 Schumann viewed
his father as an “old fogey,” yet denotes parents and teachers as the most important factors for
avoiding fanaticism.49
Unsurprisingly, a child could easily be confused by the conflicting lessons taught at home
and those taught at school and in the Hitler Youth. Henry Metelmann’s father tried to warn him
about the dangers of “die braune Pest” (the Nazis), but Metelmann dismissed those warnings.50
He was torn between the Nazi indoctrination he received and his parents’ disapproval of that
indoctrination. He explains, “And I felt so confused and did not really know anymore what to
think, where I could find the truth – and what was the truth.”51 Others mention being confused
by their parents’ example. For instance, Melita Maschmann mentions that she received
44
Blackburn, preface.
Reese, 93.
46
Ibid.
47
Henry Metelmann, A Hitler Youth: Growing Up in Germany in the 1930s (London: Caliban
Books, 1997), 115.
48
Heck, 30.
49
Schumann, 29, 48.
50
Metelmann, 3-5.
51
Metelmann, 90.
45
14
conflicting lessons from her parents. She refers to her “parents’ example” of being anti-semitic,
yet being kind to Jews on an individual level.52
Nonetheless, several youth chose to abide by their parents’ warnings and avoid, as best
they could, the Hitler Youth and Nazi ideology. When he was a child, Pfrengle thought his
mother was “overly rigid and authoritarian” in her “God-fearing modesty, law-abiding civility,
and adherence to traditional moral, religious, and family values.”53 Later, he began to “really
understand and appreciate what my mother had done for me, and [me and my brother].”54 Gisela
McBride, who claims not to have been “brainwashed,” gives thanks to her mother. She claims,
“Without Mama, I might have believed many things I was told during my 12 years of the Third
Reich.”55 Eycke Strickland gives credit to her parents, who were Jewish rescuers, for “…[urging
me and my siblings] to uphold and defend human rights and justice, freedom of speech, and
tolerance, and to strive for peace among nations.”56
Jost Hermand’s mother strongly disliked the Hitler Youth, and that attitude is also
reflected in her son’s stance toward the organization. Hermand notes his mother’s multiple
attempts - some successful, some not - to switch him to different, less strict troops and to make
the conditions more bearable for him.57 Horst Krueger’s parents were apolitical, though he
mentions his mother’s antisemitism.58 Neither Hermand nor Krueger adopted Nazi beliefs. In
52
Melita Maschmann, Account Rendered: A Dossier on my Former Self. Translated by Geoffrey
Strachan (London: Abelard-Schuman Limited, 1965). Originally published as Fazit: Kein Rechtfertigungsversuch
(Stuttgart, 1963), 41.
53
Pfrengle, 1.
54
Ibid.
55
Gisela R. McBride, Through My Eyes: Memoirs of Hitler’s Berlin (Lanham, Maryland: Hamilton
Books, 2006), 95-96.
56
Eycke Strickland, Eyes are Watching, Ears are Listening: Growing Up in Nazi Germany 19331946 (Lincoln, NE: iUniverse, 2008), 288.
57
Hermand, 19.
58
Krueger, 62.
15
fact, during the final days of war, Krueger switched sides, escaping to American territory, partly
because of being “filled with hatred” about his experiences as a soldier.59
Children who had Nazi parents express feelings of anger when reflecting upon the role
their parents played in their development. For instance, Bruno Manz blames his father for
indoctrinating him with hate at such an early age. In the preface to his memoir, he states, “It will
be painful to describe how my father fanned the flames of hatred and seared my eight-year-old
soul with the brand of anti-Semitism.”60 Irmgard Hunt’s mother was also a supporter of the
Nazis. In the immediate aftermath of the war, Hunt blamed her mother. She explains, “…I felt
my wish to blame, to accuse, to assign guilt become overwhelmingly strong. Since Mutti was the
person closest at hand, she became my first target.”61 Moreover, some youths regretted that their
parents did not provide them with stronger values. Ursula Mahlendorf states that she and her
brother regretted that their parents did not steer them away from Nazism. She claims,
“We agreed that it would have been enormously helpful to us if even one of the adults
around us had attempted to counteract this indoctrination, had told us that other values
existed besides bravery, toughness, obedience, and loyalty unto death – that other nations,
races, and peoples valued their way of life as much as we did ours and were worthy of
respect. We both envied friends we made later in life whose parents tried to keep them
out of Hitler Youth, sometimes succeeding. I don’t remember talking much to my
mother, let alone to my aunts, about what we were learning in school and in the Hitler
Youth, or about what I thought and felt.”62
Before criticizing parents, however, it is also important to keep in mind the risks parents
and other adults faced in trying to persuade youths against National Socialist ideology. Some
youths were so wrapped up in Nazi ideology that they would report anyone, including parents,
teachers, and friends, who appeared to be a “threat” to Nazism. Such reports had the potential to
59
Krueger, 165.
Manz, 5.
61
Hunt, 203.
62
Mahlendorf, 107-108.
60
16
result in fines or imprisonment. Alfons Heck explains, “If any German, with the exception of my
grandmother, whom I considered both politically naïve and hot-tempered, had made such a
remark to me, I would have notified the authorities.”63 He continues, “…our parents and elders
had become afraid of us and our single-minded fanaticism.”64 Metelmann claims that although
he would never report on his father, “…the influence of school and Hitler Youth had created a
rift between us.”65 Certainly, some parents were cautious simply for these reasons.
Religion, although it did not have any significant influence upon the fanatical
development of most youths, deserves mentioning. Kater argues that “religious and regional
factors had something to do with a teen’s willingness to join,” but he does not discuss the issue
in depth.66 I argue that religion seems to have played little, if any, role in preventing fanaticism.
It seems evident that, by and large, most German families were not religious during the Third
Reich. Of all 14 memoir authors, only one mentioned having a very religious background. It was
not until many years after the war that youths recognized the importance of having religious
parents. For instance, Hermann Pfrengle acknowledges the importance of his mother, who
“[adhered] to traditional moral, religious, and family values.”67 Eycke Strickland also
acknowledges the importance of her faith, which she had obtained from her mother.68
Nonetheless, it is important to remember that religion was extremely discouraged by the
Nazis. Blackburn, pointing out a Hitler Youth song with the lyrics “We need no Christian virtue,
for our leader is Adolf Hitler,” maintains, “The training the Hitler Youth received was
63
Heck, 45.
Heck, 45.
65
Metelmann, 109.
66
Kater, 24.
67
Pfrengle, 1.
68
Strickland, 289.
64
17
consciously designed to displace the religious convictions of its members.”69 Additionally,
Catholic youth groups, which were gradually phased out and forbidden, were one of the main
sources of resistance against the Hitler Youth.
Although most Germans were not religious during the Third Reich, several experienced
religious conversions in the immediate aftermath of World War II. Hunt claims, “My newfound
Lutheran belief in God was as deep and moving an experience as any young teenage girl could
have. Through many years, it brought me solace and hope and served as a beacon by which I
tried to navigate the newly opening world.”70 Manz does not discuss religion, but he begins his
book by quoting from the Gospel of John.71 Strickland begins her book by quoting Deuteronomy
4:9.72 Johnson became a devout Christian, as well.73 Maschmann is the only one who mentions
becoming angry at God in the aftermath of the war. Of the war atrocities, she thought, “The
power for such monstrous madness could only lie in God’s hand.”74
Therefore, upon analysis of the factors described above, it appears education and parents
had the most potential for altering a youth’s path towards Nazi fanaticism. In general, most
youths experienced the same type of indoctrination from the Nazi party. However, the impact of
education and the influence of one’s parents varied drastically for each child. Parents were
typically the strongest deterrent against the Nazi cause. Yet, parents and teachers had just as
much potential to promote Nazism. Religion seems to have had little, if any, impact upon one’s
decision to become a Nazi. The main conclusion that can be drawn from this data is that each
youth had a different experience because of the complexity of the previously mentioned
69
Blackburn, 85.
Hunt, 229.
71
Manz, preface.
72
Strickland, preface.
73
Johnson, 50.
74
Maschmann, 196.
70
18
elements. Thus, this conclusion does not support the concept of collective guilt. The Hitler Youth
as a whole could not be victims or perpetrators. Instead, each individual youth must be studied as
an individual case.
For the second part of my argument, I stress that the personal reflections of guilt, by the
youths themselves, are also extremely important in the evaluation of culpability of German
youth. There are two primary areas I want to address, both of which are extremely insightful.
First, I want to examine the authors’ purposes for writing their memoirs. Their purposes are
generally the same: to prevent future genocides. Thus, despite their past roles and actions
(perpetrator, victim, bystander), the former youths’ main concern is certainly a positive one.
Second, I want to examine the authors’ own responses to the question, “Were German youth
victims or perpetrators?” My argument is that it is hard to judge someone’s guilt without first
letting that person provide an explanation or defense.
In the immediate aftermath of the war, most of the children did not think about guilt on
two reasons. First, the extent of atrocities had not been realized yet. Initial claims of Germany’s
war crimes were viewed simply as horrible rumors or propaganda by those who had won the
war, the Allied forces. Second, Germany had faced extreme physical destruction during the war.
For most Germans, it was difficult enough to survive day to day. Heck explains, “My first
priority was naked survival, not moral regeneration.”75
In fact, for most German youth, it took years to be re-educated and to cope with guilt.
Heck asks, “When did I begin to perceive the evil of Nazism, and when did I forsake Hitler? Not
for quite some time… It took years of painful re-education to accept, reluctantly, our slaughter of
75
Heck, 197.
19
millions of people whom we had decreed to be ‘subhuman.’”76 Mahlendorf asserts that she did
not “understand the full impact” of Third Reich crimes until “[she] came to live abroad in the
1950s.”77 Maschmann claims that it took “a good dozen years to complete [her] inner break with
National Socialism,” but claims that some of her friends were still undergoing “the process.”78
Schumann asserts that it took many years and several factors (“the influence of parents, teachers,
and older friends; the intensive study of literature and history’ and…two immensely valuable and
eye-opening stays abroad…”) to experience “true reeducation.”79
After several years of processing their guilt, the former youths often found it necessary to
write about their experiences. Their reasons for writing coincide with the question of culpability.
The two main reasons for writing are to prevent future genocides and to aid in one’s own
struggle with guilt. These two reasons stand out to me as very humble in nature. Without a doubt,
the primary motivation for writing is to educate others about genocide – a very understandable
motivation. The second reason, aiding in one’s own struggle with guilt, is more striking to me.
The youths do not seem to be writing to “justify” their guilt or “prove” their innocence. Instead,
they seem to be sincerely soul-searching and simply trying to “explain.”
First, many of the authors want to make sure that genocide never occurs again and that
people will never be brainwashed again. In general, they view this as an “obligation.” Hunt
claims, “It was left to the next generation – my own – to seek to discover what people thought,
knew, and chose to do and how it was possible for Hitler to receive their silent cooperation and
often enthusiastic support.”80 Mahlendorf claims, “…Fewer [memoir authors] seem to
76
Heck, 197.
Mahlendorf, 9.
78
Maschmann, 198.
79
Schumann, X.
80
Hunt, 3.
77
20
understand the implications of such a childhood, or to attempt to formulate the obligations that
arise from it.”81 Manz insists that his story is necessary for “humankind as a whole,” for “the
self-analysis of humanity.”82 He states, “I wrote this book to make my contribution, however
small, to the cause of preventing Nazism from ever happening again.”83 Maschmann writes,
“None of us…should feel immune from the possibility of one day, too, becoming the blind and
cold-hearted servant of evil.”84 Pfrengle states, “I sincerely hope the reader will reflect on the
dangers of perverted ideology, misled idealism, and excessive nationalism which…are by no
means limited to the Nazi regime.”85
The major audience for many of the memoirs is youth. Some memoirs are written
specifically for a young age group reading level, such as Johnson’s The Hitler I Knew.
Schumann claims his “one all-encompassing motivation” is “to show young Americans how easy
it is, given the right historical and political circumstances, to form, control, and manipulate a
whole nation – especially its young people.”86 Mahlendorf wrote her memoir “to show today’s
students, through an early life history like [her] own, how the right leaders in an ordinary small
town could produce potential perpetrators.”87
Second, the authors seek simply to come to terms with what they experienced. They
claim that writing a memoir is helpful to their own healing. In the immediate aftermath of the
war, German psychiatrist and philosopher Karl Jaspers gave the following advice to young
Germans: “We Germans are indeed obliged without exception to understand clearly the question
81
Mahlendorf, 2.
Manz, 5.
83
Manz, 274.
84
Maschmann, 221.
85
Pfrengle, XV
86
Schumann, X.
87
Mahlendorf, 4.
82
21
of our guilt, and to draw the conclusion. What obliges us is our human dignity.”88 He claims that
coping with guilt is “a matter of individual solitude,” but argues that “What comes out of it has
to create the essential basis for what will in future be the German soul.”89
Several of the memoir authors take Jaspers’ stance. For instance, Hermand explains, “If
you look more closely, you’ll see that what [former youths] endured as children affects them in
countless ways today – in their thoughts, actions, emotions…”90 He argues,
“My generation…still faces the psychological work of remembering our past in order to finally
free ourselves for the future. If we do not rise to the challenge, we will not only be repeating
what was drilled into us; even worse, we will be passing our unexamined attitudes on to others.
And in this way, fascism will have achieved its goal after all, continuing to affect successive
generations of Germans.”91
Krueger, who wrote his memoir in 1965, explains that the writing process helped in coping with
guilt. He states, “[Writing] was a beginning, a start, a first attempt to gain my own freedom.”92
He further claims, “The odd thing about literature is that such personal salvation manages to save
others as well.”93 Similarly, Mahlendorf writes that “…it took the long years since then and the
encouragement of many friends who know my story to muster the courage to write [my
experience] down.”94 She claims,
“By writing, my parents came alive again. I could understand what had driven them and attempt
to make my peace with them. In writing, my grandparents came to life. This time around I could
express what I felt for them, even as I set them a memorial. I could revive the friends of my
childhood and my teen years, and in writing of them, mourn them. I could recreate what I felt for
my teachers, for those whom I loved and for those about whom I felt profound ambivalence, a
mixture of gratitude and revulsion. Through writing, all of them came alive, and I could mourn
88
Karl Jaspers, The Question of German Guilt. Translated by E.B. Ashton. (New York: Capricorn
Books, 1961). Originally published as Die Schuldfrage (Munich: Piper Verlag GmbH, 1947), 28.
89
Jaspers, 74.
90
Hermand, 123.
91
Hermand, 125.
92
Krueger, 234.
93
Krueger, 234.
94
Mahlendorf, 1.
22
their loss.”95
For the most part, the German youth viewed themselves as victims. As historian Rempel
explains, “The Hitler Youth had robbed them of a normal childhood.”96 Heck makes a very
strong statement on this, claiming “We, the young fanatics of the Hitler Youth, had also become
the Fuehrer’s victims.”97 Reflecting upon his experience in prison, he claimed, “I cried silently
at times and I prayed, and there was a rage of self-pity. Why me? What have I done? And
suddenly out of this rose a hatred toward Hitler…”98 Krueger claims, “[The Nazis] had put my
childhood in irons, they had put handcuffs on the foolish dream of my youth.”99 Metelmann
maintains, “But I nevertheless wonder how guilty I was for being a participant in the Nazi warmachine – or, on the other hand, to what extent was I a victim of that vile system which governs
us all?”100 Mahlendorf claims that she felt shame for thinking of herself as a survivor: “…I had
appropriated the term survivor from the victims of the Holocaust, the potential perpetrator
making herself into a victim as well.”101 Manz also feels he was a victim. He explains, “I do not
for a moment compare my suffering with that of the victims in Hitler’s prisons and concentration
camps… My suffering was of a different kind – not as brutal as theirs but longer lasting. It was
more subtle and insidious, like a creeping sickness or a gradual poisoning, drop by drop.”102
Melita Maschmann is the only author who truly felt like a perpetrator. Reflecting on her
guilt, she remarks,
95
Mahlendorf, 343.
Rempel, 252.
97
Heck, 202.
98
Heck, 202.
99
Krueger, 107.
100
Metelmann, 237.
101
Mahlendorf, 8.
102
Manz, 4-5.
96
23
“What right have I…to claim that I was still too young to perceive what was going on? Only the
sham right of a bad conscience afraid of the truth. I was not too young but too hard-hearted, too
cowardly, and too flattered by the role of leader which I played in the Third Reich to admit that
with my whole being I was helping to commit a crime unworthy of mankind.”103
Additionally, Wilhelm Gehlen was the only author who had predominantly positive and guiltfree memories regarding youth. However, this could be because he was one of the youngest –
age 12 in 1945. He does not reflect upon Nazi ideology, but rather on the military aspects of the
war, such as “[knowing] how to change the barrel on a 20 mm gun” at age ten.104
Kater doubts the sincerity of the memoirs written by former Hitler Youth members. He
boldly takes a stance on their sincerity remarking, “Their own discussion…of their possible
status as ‘victims’ was strongly indicative of a bad conscience, of wishing to explain away any
part of their biographies from before the Nazis’ humiliating surrender.”105 However, upon
evaluation of the reasons for which the authors wrote their memoirs, Kater’s argument does not
hold much weight. As mentioned earlier, the former youths were writing for the purposes of
educating and warning of the dangers of genocide. Rather than simply ignoring that past, these
authors generally want to bring genocide to public attention in sincere hopes of healing as
individuals and as a nation and ensuring that genocide is prevented worldwide.
In closing, I want to stress just how difficult it was to write this brief 20-25 page paper.
Before I started researching this topic, I had no idea that it would be so complicated. Guilt is
simply not a “light” topic. I found common threads that tie the memoirs together, but, ultimately,
each individual author had a unique experience. One had to be “lucky” to avoid getting caught in
the trap of Nazi brainwashing. Because the topic is so complex, I think it is best to judge each
103
Maschmann, 214.
Wilhelm R. Gehlen and Don A. Gregory. Jungvolk: The Story of a Boy Defending Hitler’s Third
Reich (Philadelphia: Casemate, 2008), viii.
105
Kater, 262.
104
24
youth individually rather than placing the entire German youth under a collective guilt. The
difference in indoctrination, education, and home life that one experienced drastically altered a
youth’s path towards fanaticism. Only by studying a youth’s development into Nazism and
reflections on his or her experiences can one truly judge whether a child was a victim or
perpetrator.
25
Bibliography
Brennecke, Fritz. The Nazi Primer: Official Handbook for Schooling the Hitler Youth. Translated
by Harwood L. Childs. New York: Harper and Brothers Publishers, 1938.
Blackburn, Gilmer W. Education in the Third Reich: Race and History in Nazi Textbooks.
Albany: State University of New York Press, 1985.
Gehlen, Wilhelm R. and Don A. Gregory. Jungvolk: The Story of a Boy Defending Hitler’s Third
Reich. Philadelphia: Casemate, 2008.
Gilbert, G.M. Nuremberg Diary. 1947. Reprint, New York: Da Capo Press, 1995.
Heck, Alfons. A Child of Hitler: Germany in the Days When God Wore a Swastika. Frederick,
CO: Renaissance House, 1985.
Hermand, Jost. A Hitler Youth in Poland: The Nazis’ Program for Evacuating Children During
World War II. Translated by Margot Bettauer. Evanston, Illinois: Northwestern
University Press. Originally published as Als Pimpf in Polen: Erweiterte
Kinderlandverschickung, 1940-1945 (Frankfurt am Main, Fischer Taschenbuch Verlag,
1993).
Hunt, Irmgard A. On Hitler’s Mountain: Overcoming the Legacy of a Nazi Childhood. New
York: HarperCollins Publishers Inc., 2005.
Jaspers, Karl. The Question of German Guilt. Translated by E.B. Ashton. New York: Capricorn
Books, 1961. Originally published as Die Schuldfrage (Munich: Piper Verlag GmbH,
1947).
Johnson, Thea. The Hitler I Knew: A Young Girl’s Memoirs of WWII in Germany. Bloomington,
IN: AuthorHouse, 2006.
Kater, Michael. Hitler Youth. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2004.
Koch, H.W. The Hitler Youth: Origins and Development 1922-45. New York: Stein and Day,
1975.
Krueger, Horst. A Crack in the Wall: Growing up Under Hitler. Translated by Ruth Hein. New
York: Fromm International Publishing Corporation, 1982. Originally published as Das
zerbrochene Haus (Hamburg, 1966).
Mahlendorf, Ursula. The Shame of Survival: Working Through a Nazi Childhood. Pennsylvania:
Pennsylvania State University Press, 2009.
Manz, Bruno. Mind in Prison: The Memoir of a Son and Soldier of the Third Reich. Washington:
26
Brassey’s, 2000.
Maschmann, Melita. Account Rendered: A Dossier on my Former Self. Translated by Geoffrey
Strachan. London: Abelard-Schuman Limited, 1965. Originally published as Fazit: Kein
Rechtfertigungsversuch (Stuttgart, 1963).
McBride, Gisela R. Through My Eyes: Memoirs of Hitler’s Berlin. Lanham, Maryland: Hamilton
Books, 2006.
Metelmann, Henry. A Hitler Youth: Growing Up in Germany in the 1930s. London: Caliban
Books, 1997.
Pfrengle, Hermann O and Wilbur D. Jones, Jr. Forget That You Have Been Hitler Soldiers: A
Youth’s Service to the Reich. Shippensburg, PA: Burd Street Press, 2001.
Reese, Dagmar. Growing Up Female in Nazi Germany. Translated by William Templer. Ann
Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2006. Originally published as “Straff, aber nicht
stramm- Herb, aber nicht derb”: Zur Vergesellschaftung von Maedchen durch den Bund
Deutscher Maedel im sozialkulturellen Vergleich zweier Milieus. (Germany: Weinheim
and Basel, 1989)
Rempel, Gerhard. Hitler’s Children: The Hitler Youth and the SS. Chapel Hill: The University of
North Carolina Press, 1989.
Schumann, Willy. Being Present: Growing Up in Hitler’s Germany. Kent, OH: Kent State
University Press, 1991.
Strickland, Eycke. Eyes are Watching, Ears are Listening: Growing Up in Nazi Germany 19331946. Lincoln, NE: iUniverse, 2008.