Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Similarities Differences
> In Great Depression law passed to dismiss > More chances to not follow tradition in
married women with earning husbands Weimar
(Weimar) > WW1 – 76% increase employed
> Similar to Nazi policies having married WW2 – 27% increase employed
women lose their jobs > Weimar liberal in theories and traditional in
> Both challenged by govt. through laws practice but Nazis traditional in theory and
> Brüning in Weimar, Nazi marriage law practice
> Role of mother central in both > Nazis used women to achieve their own
> In both, unmarried women could work but ends (Aryan race)
after marriage faced job discrimination > Lebensborn programme
How Nazis used > Censored radio and press, all operated under government
Censorship to > Had to follow specific instructions to keep with Nazi ideology
Control > October 1933 – Decree making all published material responsibility of editor
“Unacceptable > 10 May 1933 – Book burning, over 25,000 books considered “unsound” burnt
Cultures” > Mainly books by Jewish authors, included textbooks, foreign authors and ones with an
unacceptable message or were “intellectual”
Acceptable > Goebbels set up Reichskulturkammer with main goal to control and distribute culture to people
Cultural > Wanted artists to have nationalistic image, showcase rural lifestyle, encourage Nazi ideology
Activities and > Sport promoted to make people healthier
Reinforcing > Aryan Olympic athletes, prohibited Jews and non-Aryan athletes from competing in events
Them > Used “Strength Through Joy” scheme to promote
> Took trips to theatre/opera/art galleries so exposed to culture Nazis encouraged
> Made lots of holidays on calendar including Mother’s Day
Why Cultural > Public holidays Nazis made filled with military parades often led by propaganda speeches
Developments > Large cities also had armoured vehicles and tanks
Controversial > Made culture seem more militaristic
> Book burning was dramatic and controversial event as tried to destroy other forms of culture
> Belief Nazis tried to destroy old Weimar culture and replace with more traditional culture
Education in the FRG, 1945-89
Aims of the > Wanted to de-Nazify curriculum and re-educate German society/culture
Allies for > May 1946 – banned Nazi books, films and anything teaching Nazi ideals
German > Vetted teachers for Nazi sympathisers
Education > Prevented career selection at age of 10
System > Wanted primary and secondary schools to be same for all
> 1945 – US zone = class size of 85 for children aged 6-10, 510,000 children this age had no
school, US also brought in over 5 million textbooks
> Soviets set up teacher-training courses, soon had 40,000 teachers from working class
backgrounds (also teaching communist values)
> Introduced system of 8 years followed by 3 year apprenticeship or 4 years high school,
followed by university
Allies Success > Successful
in Achieving > Reformed most of pre-university education
Aims > Weeded out Nazis from Universities
> 1945 – Allies said schools would reopen
> Failed
> Ex-nazis who lost their jobs got them back as no one was qualified
> 1947 Bavaria – 85% of the teachers who lost their jobs were reinstated
> Allies pressed for reform of the system but hadn’t been changed by time FRG was set up
Role of Lander > Under Basic Law, Lander remained responsible for educational and cultural policies
in Education > Resulted in very few secular schools in South and more in North
> In charge of creating reforms for education
> Created problems as even if federal government agreed on reforms, still had to convince
Lander to adopt them which rarely happened
> Had meetings throughout 1960’s-70’s discussing education being made widely available to
everyone on a fairer basis
> Resulted in indoctrination of comprehensive schools
Education Crisis > Concern’s that university system failing to serve Germany’s needs
in 1960’s > Student numbers increased and facilities being provided were inadequate
> Curriculum too old fashioned and people wanted a more democratic education
> Didn’t teach technology or economics
> Mainly catered to children of academics, civil servants and the rich
Overcoming the > State provided free education up to end of secondary school
Crisis > Parents encouraged to keep children in secondary education
> Number of children in Gymnasium increased (853,400 in 1960 to 2,019,000 in 1980)
> More students went to university (1960 - 239,000, 1980 – 749,000)
> 1971 – Federal Education Promotion Act gave mixture of state funding and state loans
> Encouraged students from working class families to go
Why > After war parents will have wanted their children to work to get money for the family
Educational > Switch to democratic approach and wanting children to stay at university made this happen
Developments less, potentially long term causing less children to work
Controversial > Would have caused tensions to government with some families
> FRG failed to de-Nazify as ex-Nazis still employed into education
> Seemed unfair as most students upper class so widened the gap
Cultural Experimentation in the FRG, 1945-89
Cultural > Traditionally, Germany seen as leader of European culture
Tensions > After war, older generation wanted to return to this
> Easy to remove Nazi control and reintroduce culture they had banned
> Also able to introduce free press with limited censorship
> Found hard to adapt to new cultures Allies brought with them
> Shakespeare from UK and Hollywood from USA
Cultural > Number of social movements in FRG meant they appealed to all ages
Cohesion > Anti-nuclear, ecological and alternative lifestyle movements key examples
> All rejected consumerism and wanted peaceful and equal society
> Wanted an established society to save it from destruction
> Everyone demanded change in one form or another and were united in their cause
Cultural divide > Before 1960’s, main genre focused on films about Germany
in Cinema in > After 1960, films mainly focused on American culture, attractive locations and romance
1960’s stories, contrasting the bombing in Germany
> Regionalist characters contributed to development of FRG’s “regional culture”
> Young film makers developed new styles and themes
> Focused on Germany’s immediate past or on social problems in FRG
Generational > Older generation wanted to see 1945 as Year Zero
Tensions > Younger generation wanted to focus on past (“What did you do in the war, daddy?”)
> Older wanted to return to traditional German culture and comfortable consumerist lifestyle
> Younger wanted less consumerist lifestyle and culture facing present and past rather than
embracing distant past or American culture
Why Nazi Rule > Generational
Significant in > Older people who lived through Nazi rule wanted more to hide/cast a line over Nazi period
Developing and be in favour of “Year Zero” policy
Cultural and > Younger demanded older confront and deal with past, wanted to know what happened in this
Generational period as many older avoided talking about it
Tensions > “What did you do in the war, daddy?”
> Cultural
> Nationalistic and conformist nature of Nazi period may have influenced older generation to
be more loyal to traditional values
> Younger generation more enthusiastic to absorb Western culture into Germany’s
Non-Nazi > Generational
related Cultural > Many youth protested against government’s involvement with nuclear power for weapons
and and fuel (alliance with NATO)
Generational > Young more keen to embrace Western Culture (especially US culture) and reject strict Nazi
Tensions values
> Rise of the Green Party (1976 – 0 seats, 1987 – 42 seats)
> Cultural
> FRG removed Nazi controls and reintroduced a “regenerate culture”
> Free Press was re-established alongside Ally run newspapers (promote democracy)
> “Cultural offerings” given by Western country’s running zones
> Hollywood in US zone, Shakespeare in British zone
> Rejection of consumerism and desire for peaceful and equal society developed
Why Cultural > Embracing Western Cultures led to Germany’s own traditional culture being modified and
and changed
Generational > Went completely against nationalist protection of German culture and country that Nazis had
Tensions > Generations had complete opposing views on how to treat the past
Controversial > Older wanted to avoid completely, younger wanted them to confront it and learn what “really”
happened
> Especially seen in film culture like “Der Junge Torless” exposing brutal past of Nazis’
Jewish prosecution
The Status Of, and Attitudes Towards, Ethnic
Minorities, 1918-32
Legal Status of Ethnic Minorities
Received lower wages
Article 113 of Weimar Constitution – social groups speaking a different
language could not legally be stopped from using it
o Could not legally be stopped from preserving national identity in
way they ran their schools and daily lives
o Liberal law, not always implemented
Didn’t control laws made against minorities by Lander and
had regional variation
Less likely to be hired than a “German” man
Dependent on where they lived as to level of discrimination
Why Did the Final Solution Start in 1942 and Not Before?
Before 1942 – had already begun to remove Jewish people in rather extreme
ways (killing squads and centres)
However, final solution was implemented in 1942 as an almost last resort in order
to try and ensure the extermination of all the Jewish people throughout Europe
o German army was practically unbreakable by 1942, were very powerful
and had control and/or support of many countries in Europe
1942 – Final Solution brought in as they had power to try and exterminate all
Jewish people in Europe at this point
Was the Status of Ethnic Minorities in Nazi Germany very Different from Weimar
Germany?
Jewish people had relatively bad status in Weimar in view of some of the public,
government, etc.
o “Jew Berlin”, assassination of Rathenew, anti-Semitic groups
However Article 113 worked to make ethnic minorities status equal
o Was liberal law that wasn’t always implemented by Lander
Other ethnic minorities also had lower status and were highly discriminated
against
o Mixed race children seen as “Germany’s shame”
o However, was no federal legislation against Gypsies
Still had a very low status in Nazi Germany but decreased and was made worse
by Hitler’s hatred of Jews
o Status made lower as essentially treated like animals and were killed and
disposed of without second thought
The Status Of, and Attitudes Towards, Ethnic Minorities in the
FRG, 1945-89
Initial View towards > Initially seen as a problem as needed housing and feeding
Refugees
How the Economic > Created a need for more workers so government wanted to recruit them
Boom of the 1950s > Unions feared it would force wages down and undercut existing workers
Changed the > Government guaranteed non-German workers same wages
Governments Attitude > Agreed to give preference to German workers when hiring
Federal Office for > Set up in Nuremburg to run offices in countries where West Germany had labour
Labour Recruitment recruitment treaties
and What it > People could apply for work and have a physical examination to ensure fit
guaranteed > Signed contract for particular job which couldn’t leave for one year
> Employers provided basic accommodation and work for them
Did it improve the > Didn’t improve status much as accommodation provided by employers generally near
Status of Foreign factories or outside of town so were cut off from the community
Workers? > Couldn’t integrate with them so people unlikely to change their opinions of them meaning
status wouldn’t improve much
Types of Jobs > Generally gave guest workers heavy manual labour jobs
Germans got from > Doing jobs Germans didn’t want to do so weren’t taking work from them
1961-73 due to Guest > 1961-73 – 3million German workers switched from industrial work to white-collar jobs
Workers > 1961-71 – about 870,000 Germans left jobs in mining and taken by 1.1million guests
Organisations that > Presumed stay was temporary so didn’t have same rights as a German citizen
Helped Guest > Some unions helped them adjust to work, less helpful about long-term assimilation
Workers > Support from church organisations and own organisations
> Catholic organisation Caritas and Protestant organisation Diakonisches Werk
How the Recession > Created hostility to guest workers, especially if didn’t speak German or try to integrate
Affected Attitudes > Many landlords refused to take in guest workers
towards Guest > Helped confine them to living with other guest workers in poorest areas
Workers > After recession demand for guest workers returned, still faced hostility from some right-
wing groups
> Made worse when started to demonstrate for better working and living conditions
How Guest Workers > Oil crisis and rise in unemployment put pressure on guests to leave jobs and Germany
were treated after > November 1973 – government put stop on hiring and banned permits for families of guest
1973 workers already in country, number of workers fell to just under 2million
> 1974 – Ford car works offered guest workers “voluntary severance packages” based on
time working at factory as mass layoffs and contracts not renewed otherwise
> Many accepted but not realised legally workers laid off on points system so German with
2 children laid off before Turkish guest worker with 4
> 1975 – government gave guest workers children same benefits as other children
> 1977 – ban removed, workers started coming in again
> 1978 – first Federal Commissioner for Foreigners’ Affairs appointed by Helmut Schmidt
> Worked for rights of foreign workers and promote their integration
> Clear set of rules applying for unrestricted residence, not citizenship, made
How Education > Basic Law stated a “democratic education” with equal opportunity for all
Affected Treatment of > Tried to persuade Lander to provide mixed culture learning groups
Guest Worker > Give children books in their mother tongue and German
Children > Number of foreign guest work children rose (1976 – 165,000, 1983 – 200,000)
> 60% Muslim so faced cultural problems with education provision
> Most Muslim guest worker children started school at 6 with no pre-school education and
language help as most pre-schools run by Christians, mainly Catholics
> Many set up own national schools as children not learning in state schools further
hindering integration