Shelley Michaels 12/10/03
To what extent did Nazism change society 1933-45?
From the ashes of the old, rose a new German society, in which the Germany community as a whole prospered, and not the individual. The in impact of nazism resulted in many social changes: discrimination of women and ethic minorities, unarticulated public opinions, suppression of opposition, lack of political involvement etc. However, this to the majority of the German people seemed a small price to pay for economic security and an increase in living standards. Although, on the other hand, it could be argued that Hitler’s vision of volksgemeinschaft was simply a propaganda gimmick, and in truth, nothing had changed. The German people still lived in a society where the class and not ability determined self worth. Thus, one is left to speculate the extent to which German society changed, if at all, due to Nazism.
The elimination of ethic minorities was the most important social change felt not only by Germany, but also territories occupied by Germans. For no Regime before or after the Nazi Regime had ever taken Anti-Semitism to such an extreme. Jews were used as scapegoats, by blaming them for all the “ills”, which had affected society before Hitler’s arrival into power. This created a new sense of unity amongst the German people which had not existed before the Nazi regime; and thus signifies social change in respect to peoples attitudes. The Jewish were dehumanised by Nazi propaganda, and became little more than an evil, greedy, communist stereotype. The message of Nazi racial propaganda was always the same – “if Jews lefts Germany everything would be sweet and light”. It is interesting, however, that Nazi propaganda never actual explained how this would be achieved. Although, one must admit that Hitler’s attempt to achieve a pure Aryan community was the most coherent, coherent and revolutionary aspect of Nazism, and therefore led to the most profound social change. For example, The Nuremberg law, of 1935, which banned Aryans from having interracial marriages with non Aryans: Jews, gypsies and other asocial groups. Moreover, The Jews had been charged with dominating spheres, such as banking, business real estate, and therefore by banning Jews from the top professions Nazis hoped to reduce there influence over business, commerce and professions. However, Jews only made up 1% of the population, and therefore it could be said that the dominance of the Jews were over exaggerated This line of argument is support by the fact that more Jews were employed in low paid jobs/ low status jobs. Only 7% of Jews made were employed in public service and professions. Moreover, it could be said that, the unsuccessfulness of Jewish Emigration limited the impact Nazism had on social change. By 1937, only 120,000 out of 503,000 Jews had left Germany, and many had returned lulled into a false sense of security that the worst was over by the regime’s cautious policies. On the other hand it could be argued that, any problems concerning Emigration was overshadowed by the Holocaust, which truly marked a profound change in Germany society; 6 million Jews were estimated to have been killed. Lucy Dawldowicz argued that “anti-Semitism was the core of Hitler’s system of beliefs and central motivation of his policies. This argument is supported my the fact that Hitler’s anti-Semitism campaign was speed up during the years of war. This in turn indicates consistency was key to strong impact racial propaganda had on society. On the other hand, A. J. P Taylor claims that Hitler’s anti-Semitism policies were a substitute for social change. However, ethic minorities were not the only once who were discriminated against, women to an extent suffered also because of the regime.
