Jaap Tromp 30 November 2010 Germany since 1815 1280 words Konrad Jarausch, After Hitler: Recivilizing Germans,

1945-1995. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006. 281 pp.

In this well-founded and detailed research, Konrad Jarausch aims to show to what extent general political opinion in Germany was altered after the Second World War. Jarausch emphasises the post-war trauma that existed among both the Allies and the German population. Horrified by the second war with Germany within 25 years, and more importantly, with the mass destruction of human life, the Allied powers struggled with the question how to deal with Germany from then on. Jarausch rightly states that problematic traditions of German political culture were, at least in part, to blame for [the damages wrought by the Nazis]1. Jarauschs major claim is that these problematic traditions lie in the German conception of Kultur, whereas most other European countries had adapted the more cosmopolitan and outward-looking French concept of civilisation. Jarausch concludes that the Germans did eventually make the leap into civilisation, but that it was a fairly difficult process that mixed opportunism with the genuine acceptance of Western cultural values. What is striking throughout the book is the emphasis Jarausch puts on the importance of the new Basic Law of 1949 on, initially, West Germany, and, later on the newly formed FRG. This highly important piece of legislature is thoroughly
1

Jarausch, Konrad H. After Hitler: Recivilizing Germans, 1945-1995 (New York: Oxford University Press, 2006), 6.

Jaap Tromp

pacifistic and made a considerable contribution to Westernization2, because it succeeded in combining German traditions of government with Western ideals such as basic human rights. Jarausch is right when he states that the Basic Law attempted to create an ethical foundation for the provisional structure of the Federal Republic 3. The Basic Law truly was a breach with Germanys militaristic and nationalistic past, and Jarausch rightly gives it an essential place in his account. He uses it to explain Germanys different political mentality, its anti-militarism and its stable democracy. It is vital, however, to not merely look at the Basic Law for the change of mentality that has taken place among Germans after the Second World War. Jarausch realises this to some extent. He is justified in saying that the Basic Law stabilised German democracy, because it included several safeguards, such as an electoral threshold. However, the Basic Law alone could of course not bring about a political mentality change. Jarauschs interweaves the Basic Law with societal efforts for modernisation, and this results in a powerful account with regard to Germanys departure from its inward-looking Kultur to civilisation. Similarly in his account on militarism, he connects the Basic Law to aspects of politics and society that enforced its idealistic content. Jarausch cleverly looks at the role of chancellor Adenauer in this respect. He argues that the Der Alte was capable of manoeuvring himself into a position where the reigns of power converged4 due to the weakened position of the president in the new Basic Law. This, in turn, gave the chancellor more political power and allowed Adenauer to consolidate his power to the fullest and stabilise German democracy. Adenauer would not have been able to

2 3

ibid, 114 ibid, 136 4 ibid, 136

Jaap Tromp

push his viewpoints so successfully if the Basic Law had not made the position of the chancellor so powerful. While looking at the difficulties that came with changing the Germans views toward democracy, Jarausch discusses the Basic Laws role in the realisation of a civil society in Germany. This especially happened during the turbulent 1960s when the liberal rights in the constitution allowed for the creation of a public platform for numerous protest initiatives to spread their ideas5. Jarausch shows how the Basic Law was open to societal change and facilitated it. The connection that Jarausch makes between the Basic Law and the effect it had on the establishment of an effective civil society that subsequently arose in Western Germany is another example of how Jarausch has successfully interwoven the constitutions characteristics with societal change. Jarausch rightly claims that the collapse of the nation as a reference point, and the search for other ties of loyalty6 was essential in the endeavour for civilisation. The Germans had for long been a truly nationalistic nation, with a more or less simmering militarism until this was actuated by Hitler and his henchmen. He introduces the concept of postnational state in order to explain how the Germans dealt with the trauma that showed them how destructive nationalism can be. The nation became a burden7, and for many Germans it became a spectre of devastation and humiliation, as Jarausch contends. However, he claims that the lingering presence of nationalist sentiments became increasingly stronger during the 1970s, a period during which Germany

5 6

ibid, 183 ibid, 48 7 ibid, 69

Jaap Tromp

accepted a great deal of foreigners. Jarausch shows the results of opinion polls that claim that over half [of Germans] agreed with the motto Germany for Germans8. He insists that there was rampant xenophobia9. However, the very fact that these nationalist tendencies and their affiliated parties never found a strong ground in German society and, more importantly, in German politics, shows how strongly Germany society had protected itself against violent nationalism. Germany is one of the few European countries where populist nationalist movements have not acquired a strong foothold in national politics. Jarauschs account would have been much stronger if he had acknowledged this, instead of emphasising the lasting nationalist tendencies. Certainly, these tendencies were (and are) present in German society, but the public outrage that arose against show the strong opposition against racist nationalism. Jarausch rightly contends that the Germans radical change of opinion vis-vis militarism was essential in Germanys route to an open and civilised society. Determining how this change in perception among the German people occurred is a difficult feat. Nevertheless, Jarauschs research has painted a fairly complete picture of the process. He mentions the destructiveness of the Second World War and the subsequent suffering of the German people, as well as the looming renewed destruction of the country10 during the Cold War as factors that rendered the Germans the most pacifistic people of Europe. All efforts were focused on departing from the Prussian militarist tradition. The World Wars trauma and the threat of the Cold War most surely

8 9

ibid, 250 ibid, 250 10 ibid, 39

Jaap Tromp

contributed to Germanys newly found focus on pacifism. However, Jarausch does not take into account the great influence of the creation of a new Polish state on the German military. Large quantities of German soil were annexed by Poland in 1945, while large parts of Poland were annexed by the Soviet Union. This resulted in a relocation of the Polish state from East to West, meaning that the region of East Prussia would now lie within the new Republic of Poland. The Kingdom of Prussia had an old and strong tradition of militarism, which persisted during the Weimer Republic. This archconservative world of counts and generals was eliminated after the Second World War. The impact of this on German pacifism, and Germanys subsequent departure from Kultur to civilisation should not be underestimated. The annexation of East Prussia almost literally pushed Germany to the West: to civilisation. Jarausch has written a convincing book that shows successfully how the Germans departed from old inward-looking Kultur to the open Western values that are based on the concept of civilisation. The interaction between the Basic Law on the one hand, and societal change on the other is particularly effective. His account lacks regarding Germanys anti-nationalism and pacifism, but this does not leave his account unconvincing.

Jaap Tromp