Fascism in Germany Collective Behavior

Fascism in Germany Collective Behavior Theory

The rise of fascism in Germany from a collective behavior standpoint

The issue of collective behavior in relation to social movements like fascism is one that is theoretically complex and problematized by a host of different variables and factors. The intention of this paper will be to attempt to provide an answer to the question; which sociological theory of collective behavior is most appropriate in terms of an understanding of the reason for the rise of fascism in Germany prior to the Second World War? The central thesis that will be explored is that value-added theory provides the most structured and intelligent basis for understanding of the reasons for this social phenomenon.

In a general sense, collective behaviour refer to "…any activities that are engaged in by sizable, but loosely organized groups of people." ( Gunes 2) The aspects of spontaneity and a common sense of purpose and interest among the group are also central characteristics that are associated with the term collective behaviour. Furthermore, assessments of collective behaviour refer to "… those forms of social behaviour in which usual conventions cease to guide social action and which people collectively transcend, bypass or subvert." ( Gunes 2)

Another central aspect associated with collective behaviour is that it commonly occurs when previously accepted norms and values fail to meet current needs and aspirations. This is a central theoretical facet of that will be discussed in relation to the rise of fanaticism in Germany.

As can be discerned for the above, there are many different perspectives and variables that need to be considered in a discussion of collective behavior. This is an aspect that has plagued the development of a coherent sociological theory to explain collective behaviour. As one commentator stresses;

It includes an enormous array of behaviors, processes, structures and contexts. It encompasses parts of many sociological sub-fields. It tends to focus on a particular kind of behavior, rather than on a particular institution such as schools, on abstract group properties such as social stratification or bureaucratic structure, or on a single social process such as socialization.

( Marx and McAdam )

The above view is important to keep in mind when assessing different sociological theories as they apply to the issue of German fascism as a social movement. As will be discussed, various types of collective action are more of strongly related to certain theories. A very brief overview of the theoretical history of the subject is pertinent at this point to set the stage for the discussion of fascism as a form of collective behaviour and social organization.

1. 1. Overview of theoretical origins

Simply stated, there are two general ways that this type of behaviour is described in the theory. The first derives from the analysis of crowed behaviour by Gustave Le Bon. He viewed crowd behavior in terms of negative social disruption. This is contrasted to the more modern and more positive view associated with the works of George Rude and others. Rude views collective behavior essentially as rational response by a group to achieve a particular social or political objective. These two divergent views can be seen as an originating matrix for much of modern theory. Gustave Le Bon stated in his work, The Crowd: A Study of the Popular Mind (1986) that, …when acting collectively, as in a crowd, people feel anonymous, and with their individual identity goes their individual conscience. Therefore, when involved in a crowd, or mob, people participate in violent and other types of extreme activities that they would never perform as individuals.

(Funston)

Le Bon is also known as he originator of the 'breakdown theory', which is "…the classic sociological explanation of contentious forms of collective action such as riots, rebellion, and civil violence." (Useem 215) The essence of this theory is that riots and violence occur as a result of the breakdown of the mechanisms of social control and when these mechanisms lose their restraining power. (Useem 215)

In contrast, a new approach to crowd and group began to develop in the Twentieth century. This approach was more "sympathetic' to crowd behavior. Theorist such as Pasquale Rossi (1867-1905) promoted the view that collective behavior was not irrational but was rather the expression of reason and collective will. Rude followed this trend and viewed the crowd as a collective expression of shared and common interests. This is a view that seems to be more applicable to the situation in Germany prior to the Second World War.

These views were to lead to the theories that will be discussed in this paper in relation to the rise of fascism. It should also be noted that these theories also have to be considered in relation to sociological views of social movements. The theoretical stance that seems most appropriate to the historical period under discussion is one suggested by Herbet Blumer.

Social movements can be viewed as collective enterprises to establish a new order of life. They have their inception in the condition of unrest, and derive their motive power on one hand from dissatisfaction with the current form of life, and on the other hand, from wishes and hopes for a new scheme or system of living.

(Blumer 199)

This places the emphasis on the social movement as the search for a "new order" in society, which represents a collective response to and rebellion against the status quo.

2. Summary of historical causes

In order to place these theoretical trajectories in context, a very brief summary of the historical factors that led to the rise of fascism in Germany should be considered. In brief, the German people had experienced a sense of defeat and loss of national prestige after the defeat of World War One. This was also exacerbated by very poor economic conditions, which were largely as a result of the Treaty of Versailles. The intensity of their hardship was worsened by the worldwide stock market crash and subsequent economic depression. In essence the Nazi party cleverly played on the needs of the German people and provided answers to their economic and nationalistic needs.

As many commentators have stated, the seeds of social change and collective action can be found in the social and political situation in the country and a need to redeem their sense of identity and patriotic pride. There was also a general perception of the government as being weak and ineffectual.

Many Germans perceived the parliamentary government coalition as weak and unable to alleviate the economic crisis. Widespread economic misery, fear, and perception of worse times to come, as well as anger and impatience with the apparent failure of the government to manage the crisis, offered fertile ground for the rise of Adolf Hitler and his Nazi party.

(Rise to Power)

2. Theoretical perspectives

2.1. Mass hysteria theory

This theory, also known as social contagion theory, originated with the work of Gustave Le Bon. This theory stresses the "…imitative nature of collective behavior arising out of emotional contagion." (Gunes 62) As noted above, this view falls within the ambit of the category of destructive or pessimistic theories of collective action. In this sense the rationality of the individual is overtaken by the emotional and irrational response of the crowd. In this view the crowd is anonymous and this allows the emotions of feelings of the group to take control. Mass hysteria is described as a "…instance of widespread and relatively rapid, unwitting, and nonrational dissemination of a mood, impulse, or mood form of conduct that disrupts social routines and authority patterns. It is an emotional reaction to perceived threat." (Gunes 20).

However, while it is applicable to many social contexts, this theory does not go far enough in explaining the rise of fascism as a complex social phenomenon. In the first instance, while there was certainly an emotional and impulsive component to the rise of fascism and nationalism feelings in Germany, the social movement that emerged was very rational and carefully structured.

On the other hand it is also noted by commentators that this theory does take into account the fact that, "…people having certain inferior socioeconomic attributes are more prone to involvement in mass hysteria than others" (Gunes 23), which would apply to the German situation. However, in terms of the overall theory it falls far short of providing a strong theoretical foundation to account for the wide range of social variables, such as the economic and political stressors that led to the growth of nationalistic and patriotic groups, and would eventually lead to the forms of sophisticated organization and collective action that occurred in Germany.

2.2. Emergent norm theory

This theory refers to the view that "… when people are faced with an unusual situation, they create meanings that define and direct the situation…"( Unit 22: Collective Behavior & Social ) Emergent norm theory posits the view as well that the collective or group are initially normless and that this leads to distinctive patterns of behavior. The theory was developed by Turner and Killian and is based on the assumption that crowds and collective behavior is rational and norm-governed.

One of the critiques of this theory is that it assumes that groups coalesce or converge in an environment which is normless. While the theory is suited to an explanation of spontaneous group formation, it does not address the fact that movements such as fascism are grounded on prior normative formations and value systems that lead to the collective behavior. At the same time it must be acknowledged that this theory does have value in that emphasizes the insight that

"…behavior is social" and that "…each individual's behavior is affected by the presence and actions of others." (Brown, and Lewis)

2.3. value -- added theory

Value-added theory is associated with the work of Neil Smelser. It is based on the view that various conditions have to be met for a social movement to come into being. This view is related to the concept of social change. In other words, collective action and social movements are a result of a number of variables that are founded on the collective need and desire for social change. This is a much more appropriate theory to explain the conditions that existed in Germany after the First World War.

As referred to above, the German nation was suffering under abysmal social, national and economic condition. These were a fertile breeding ground for social change and collective action that would lead to the organization of the fascist and nationalist social movement in the country.

Smelser argues that a number of aspects are necessary for collective and social movements to occur. These include the following: structural proximity; structural strain; generalized belief; precipitating factors; mobilization for action; and the failure of social control. (Brown, and Lewis) Each of these aspects has correspondences with the German situation.

Structural proximity and structural conduciveness refer to the elements that make social cohesion possible, for example spatial proximity. This is an aspect that is clearly applicable to the German situation with its integrated society and close-knit communities. This is also bolstered by the second factor. which is a coherent and shared general belief system. There was a general understanding and awareness among the German population of their situation with regard to economic hardship and the social barriers to advancement. Poverty and a loss of national integrity were elements that were felt in every region of the country. This led to the formation of many nationalist and patriotic groups. (Cole)

The above can also be related to the concept of structural strain, which is another component of this theory. There was a growing sense of inequality and injustice in the society. The German people felt marginalized by the rest of Europe as a result of Treaty of Versailles. The Treaty can be seen as a central precipitating factor in the development of collective action and the fascist social movement.