Origins and Rise of National

¶ … Origins and Rise of National Socialism

Since the Antiquity and until the 20th century human life or human nature has been thought to be restrained by certain imposed rules; from the Egyptians, who thought their human life was a preliminary stage of their universal existence and until the Fascists, who considered life as being a perpetual war, the worldly existence has been "chained." Having these in mind, we can reduce history to a simple axiom: the attempt of the people to escape from the chains the world tried to tie them with. Following these perspective, the human crowd has become vulnerable in front of some leaders who, in order to attain their hidden ambitions, have promised them the absolute freedom and the entire world at their disposal. Some of these leaders have been grouped in the Nazi Party and the most fearful of them, the same one who stood at the basis of the greatest atrocities in the 20th century, has certainly been Adolph Hitler. Thus, "the rise of Nazism in Germany was definitely the event which brought an end to the system established in Paris and also to the era of political stabilization." The reasons for this rise were, of course, manifold: the economic crisis gave strong impetus to the Nazi movement; but this was not the only - and perhaps not even the most important - reason for which it spread. "To a large extent, Nazism was an inner German phenomenon, one which" revived old political attitudes dominant in imperial Germany authoritarism and nationalism.' Therefore, in order to make an exact illustration of the reasons which stood at the basis of the appearance of the party which caused the bloodiest war in history, I will start my attempt by describing the origins of the main points of its ideology, then I will present the de facto occurrence of the facts and I will end up by arguing why Fascism and the party which promoted it occurred exactly at that period. A short conclusion will sum-up the way the Natzis and Hitler have influenced the world history and the unbearable loss of image in the case of Germany.

One the one hand, I consider that the Nazi ideology was the first reason for the amazing and fast gain of adherents: the promise of the spread of the Arian race, the only "perfect" one, in a modern world characterized by deep cultural differences and diverse nations was definitely something unusual and desired by those who believed themselves to be superior to the rest of the peoples. At first glance, it might be assumed that the origins of the 20th century authoritarian right had its roots in the first reactions of liberal and leftist forces during the French Revolution and its aftermath.

While there are undeniable links between the new authoritarian right of the late 19th century and early 20th century forces of traditionalism, neo-legitimism, and reactions that preceded them by a hundred years, no fixed goal or terminus relates them and, besides, cultural major differences also existed, as Stanley G. Payne points out: "The reactionary movements of the early 19th century tended to be simply and directly traditionalist, and aimed at avoiding the development of modern, urban, industrial, of mass society rather than transforming it, whereas by the latter part of the century the new rightist groups had achieved much greater sophistication, and tried to come in their own way to come to terms with modern, social, cultural and economic problems." In addition, Fascism, as it showed itself to the nations, was animated by an intense and obsessing sense of the difference of its own folk, by the intense awareness of its leaders of their duty of keeping different and uncorrupted by any other alien elements the regime they supported and by a conviction of the immeasurable value of their supposedly unique characteristics. On the other hand, though, the national Socialist ideology has been proven to exist long before fascism occurred on the world political scene and what is more amazing is the fact that it appeared during the French Revolution, once with the birth of Liberalism. Why during that period? A logical explanation could refer to the fact that people in 1789 had experienced a quite similar feeling as their predecessors in the Ancient Greece: the quest for the best type of regime. The cause for this historical repetition consists in the idea that the French in the 18th century were tired of the Monarchic tyrannies and were in need of a new regime, characterized by the rule of law, on the one hand, and by the people through their chosen representatives

The roots of the new forms of the authoritarian right in the late 19th and early 20th centuries have therefore been taken by those who dreamed to promote Fascism; these ideas may be found in at least four different areas: "the growth of the corporatist doctrine, primarily in catholic circles, and the ambiguous development of certain new forms of political Catholicism; the transformation of moderate or conservative, liberalism by degrees, in an overtly authoritarian direction, especially in southern Europe; the transformation of previously traditionalist anti-liberal and monarchist forces in various countries from the Latin west to Russia and the emergence of an instrumental, modernizing, and imperialist new kind of radical right in Italy."

On the other hand, the latest assumptions on the origins of Nazism point out the fact that its ideology was inspired as well, by several Romantic ideas. As Arthur Lovejoy points out, "Romanticism is important for understanding not only the authoritarian period but also the last 150 years and consequently, the contemporary intellectual, moral and political situation." A strict definition cannot be given to this term, as it does not have one accepted meaning but, on the contrary an amazing, diversity of meanings. Its roots can be found in the last quarter of the 18th century - 1780-1790- when there were discovered or revived -especially in Germany- a large number of ideas which were unfamiliar with the prior ones -those of the 17th and of the 18th century-. These ideas had a great impact on the European intellectual class and influenced its style in policy, poetry and metaphysics.

The German Romantics of the 1790s were in revolt against all the other currents of thought but first of all in the theory of art, as they claimed themselves to be the prophets of a new "modern" art - and by "modern" they understood "Romantic" -.They also had a preference for the "infinite," which had an opposed sense to the "finite," a basic characteristic of all the previous currents and ways of thought. The Romanticism was characterized mainly by a propensity for infinite values, objects for thought or imagination to contemplate, a love for mystery, an awareness of the duality of man's constitution, a preoccupation with the inner life and a sense of the man's inner corruption, all of these being contrasted with the classical sense for the "form and limits." The modern history a sort of culminating join-effect, which is at least an essential and conspicuous part of the monstrous scene presented by Germany and Europe in the 20th century. One of them is represented by the relationship of the individual with the whole, where "the whole" could have signified one of the first references to the idea of the innate connection of the state to its citizens.

But the practical tendency of this idea is profoundly modified by its fusion with another idea of the 1790s. This is the assumption of primacy, in reality and in value, of process, striving, and cumulative becoming over any static consummation - "the dislike of finality and in particular, the peculiar sensibility to the pathos of struggle, which is, by necessary implication, a struggle against something of somebody." As a political idea, this notion has been fused with the first. The individual as essentially an organ of the state does his striving through the state, which is the embodiment of the Will to Power. If it is too effective in this capacity, it must be completely integrated; it can permit no struggles within himself, between its parts. The parts must be strictly regimented for the service of the whole, whileas the State must strive for expansion, external power and yet more power.

What is seems to be obvious from these observations is that Social Nationalism was in its first form a legitimate regime, from a historic point-of-view. Practically, its ideology gathered different ideas, from different currents of thought. But what determined these ideas to be put together was the sum of events which occurred in Germany at the beginning of the 1930s.

Thus, it has been many times assumed that during that period the Weimar Republic was dominated by a strong antinationalistic and anti-republican feeling because people of the Old Regime had been held in key functions within the state apparatus. In addition, the popular support through which the republic had been installed was soon whittled down under the impact of the Treaty of Versailles and its consequences, which consisted in the fact that Germany was obliged to pay for its actions in the World War I.

Nevertheless, in the immediate period, due to the increasing prosperity, the Republican left started to benefit from the people's trust and this was proven as well by the elections in 1928. Moreover, the coalition formed by the German's people Party with the three Republican parties was undoubtedly considered a change. However, the situation was not to last long and one year afterwards in Germany the first signs of an economic depression have made themselves felt. As a consequence, people started to mistrust the political change they had sustained and that allowed the left-wing and right-wing radicalism to gain legitimacy, a fact which led to tensions of the parties which sustained those currents of thought on the political scene. In this situation, one of the logical measures, which later determined the appearance of Fascism, was that the Socialists, under the pressure of the fear that their sustainers would embrace Communism, became reticent to the economic measures which were thought to solve the problem raised by unemployment. On the other hand, the German's People's Party tried to assure their position by promoting a rather nationalistic attitude in the foreign policy. This tendency was increased by an unexpected event, mainly the death of Gustav Stressman, who had exerted a moderate influence in the German People's Party. His disappearance, together with the officials' inability to agree upon economic measures to defeat the crisis, brought the split between the right and the left wings within the government in March 1930.

Another reason for the disintegration of the party and for the formation f the Nazis Party in Germany consisted in the belief, embraced by many politicians of the time, that the reinstallation of the monarchy - which was believed to be a more authoritarian regime - would solve the problems which had occurred in the past years. Therefore, these people chose as chancellor in 1930 a rather nationalist member of the Center Party, Heinrich Bruning. He came with new convictions and ideas, believing that Germany could defeat the economic crisis only through deflations and other economic measures alike, but his financial proposal have been refused.

The clear proof that his policies were not what the Germans desired were clearly illustrated by their electoral behavior during on September 14, 1930, when they showed a stronger sustenance for the right, but not for the German People's Party or for the German Nationalist Party, which had been on Bruning's side, but for the extremist National Socialists, or Nazis and their leader Adolph Party. In my opinion, this point in history, the elections in 1930 have been decisive for the promotion of a wrong ideology, "the ideology of death', as the number of seats occupied by members of the Nazi Party was changed from 15 into 107.

The reasons for this change of perspectives of the Germans might be put on many reasons: the crisis they were encountering, the unrealistic economic measures of Bruning and the disillusion they felt because of the parties they had sustained until that moment. I addition, the new extremist ideology which was about to occur seemed promising in many perspectives; young people, a completely new ideology, which was promising to bring together the most important ideas of the 20th century, Nationalism and Socialism and, besides that, the way proposed for the rehabilitation of the country.

In order to be understood the unusual sustenance for Hitler's party, a few ideological circumstances should be mentioned: practically, Hitler wanted to suggest that what made possible for him the two together was the belief that "racial thinking would lead to national greatness and social justice"; thus, "he concluded that only a ruthlessly united and racially purified Germany could survive in the brutal struggle with other races and nations."

Thus, it became only a matter of time to see when the Nazi Party would come to power. Even though the whole government was foreseeing that, the only one who kept his self-trust was Bruning, who thought that the continuation of his policies would be endless. The greatest mistake of the time consisted in the customs union treaty signed with Austria, signed on March 1930, which was contradicting the direction in the foreign policy the country had followed until then. Thus, the political conflict crated by the act led to a great financial crisis which occurred in 1931 in Vienna, being afterwards extended to Germany and even to Great Britain. Moreover, the re-established relationships with London and Paris, two great former enemies, because of the need for financial relief led to the damage of prestige of Bruning and his policies. All these failures determined the end of his political career and, in March 1932, he was replaced by Hindenburg, who won the elections with 53% of the votes, whileas Hitler gained 36.8%. Even though the difference in votes was quite high, they still showed a clear direction: the extremist one. The tendency became so clear that even the Conservatives started to believe in it and commonly decided that only the establishment of an authoritarian government could bring back the monarchic era. Therefore, they decided to cooperate with the Nazi Party.