Hitler and the Forgotten Nazis (45 page)

Thus Hitler’s role in the Anschluss spectacle was far more passive than has commonly been supposed. His genius lay not in the day-to-day direction of Austrian Nazi affairs, in which he never had a hand, nor    even after the

Anschluss, in providing inspiring propaganda. Rather it was    in curbing the

enthusiasm of his Austrian
Parteigenossen
until the international constellation made a “peaceful” Anschluss possible.

On the other hand, the significance of the Austrian Nazis in bringing about the Anschluss has heretofore been either ignored or underestimated. They refused merely to await their “liberation.” Yet it is doubtful whether they could have seized power, even for the few hours that they did, without the intimidating presence of German troops on the Austrian frontier.

After 1938, the Austrian Nazis were quickly forgotten. Hitler and the German Nazis refused to give them credit for the Anschluss; and to postwar Austrians their memory was an embarrassment they were anxious to eradicate from history. The perverted idealism and misdirected energy of the Austrian Nazis were wasted for a cause in which they were among the first to be disillusioned. Their story, which is tragic in its own way, shows the ineffectiveness of the fascist Fiihrerprinzip in overcoming a country’s deep historical divisions, especially when the scene is void of any competent Fiihrer.

NOTES

Preface

1.    Alfred Persche, “Hauptmann Leopold,” DOW, #1460.

2.    Legal judgment by Alfons Gorbach, ibid., pp. 3-5.

3.    For the latest contribution to this debate see Gilbert Allardyce, “What Fascism Is Not.”

4.    Ernst Nolte,
Three Faces of Fascism,
p. 456.

5.    Juan Linz, “Some Notes Toward a Comparative Study of Fascism in Sociological Historical Perspective
,’
¹
p. 13; Zeev Stemhell, “Fascist Ideology,” p. 347.

6
.    R. John Rath, “The First Austrian Republic,” p. 179.

7.    For further details on the “leadership principle” see my article “Fascism and the
Fukrerprinzip”

Chapter I

1.    Friedrich Funder,
From Empire to Republic,
p. 218.

2.    Karl Stadler,
The Birth of the Austrian Republic,
1918-1921,
p. 149.

3.    Leo Pasvolsky,
Economic Nationalism of the Danubian States,
p. 95.

4.    Ibid., p. 149.

5.    Lajos Kerekes, “Wirtschaftliche und soziale Lage Osterreichs nach dem Zerfall der Doppelmonarchie,” p. 89.

6
.    Julius Braunthal,
The Tragedy of Austria,
pp. 37-38.

7.    Kurt von Schuschnigg,
The Brutal Takeover,
p. 37.

8.    Braunthal,
Tragedy of Austria,
p. 43.

9.    Kerekes, “Wirtschaftliche Lage Osterreichs,” p. 87.

10.    David Mitrany,
The Effects of the War on Southeastern Europe,
p. 174.

11.    Herbert Hoover,
The Memoirs of Herbert Hoover
, 1:395.

12.    
The World Almanac and Book of Facts,
1929, p. 588; C. A. Macartney and A. W. Palmer,
Independent Eastern Europe,
p. 201.

13.    Norbert Schausberger,
Der Griff nach Osterreich,
pp. 81-87.

14.    See Gerard Silberstein,
The Troubled Alliance
.

15.    Alfred Low,
The Anschluss Movement,
1918-1919
and the Paris Peace Conference,
p. 4. See also Duane Myers, “Berlin
versus
Vienna.” Myers points out that immediately after the collapse of Austria-Hungary the Anschluss movement was

stronger in Austria than in Germany, where diplomats feared Allied retaliation if they pushed an Anschluss program prematurely (pp. 154, 175).    ^

16.    David Strong,
Austria (October 1918-March 1919),
p. 294.    .    '

17.    Low,
Anschluss Movement,
p. 314.

18.    Ibid., pp. 452-53, 458-59.

19.    Charles Seymour and Harold B. Whiteman, Jr., eds
Letters from the Paris Peace Conference,
p. 268.

20.    Schausberger,
Griff nach Osterreich,
pp. 39, 64,79; letters of Wedel to the AA, 29 Jan. 1919, 7 Apr. 1919, NA, T-120, R. 5416/K2879CM, K287932.

21.    Schausberger,
Griff nach Osterreich,
pp. 102, 103.

22.    
Deutsche Grenzwacht,
6 May 1921.

23.    Malcolm Bullock,
Austria 1918-1938,
p. 175.

24.    Aurel Kolnai, “The Problem of Austrian Nationhood,” p. 303.

25.    Eric Kollman, “The Austrian Presidency, 1918-1958,” p. 92.

26.    Adam Wandruszka, “Die Krisedes P&rlamentarismus, 1897 und 1933,” p. 77.

27.    Mary MacDonald,
The Republic of Austria, 1918-1934,
pp. 43-44.

28.    Klemens von Klemperer,
Ignaz Seipel,
p. 227; Alfred Diament,
Austrian Catholics and the First Austrian Republic,
pp. 78-80, 120.

29.    William Hubbard, “Pblitics and Society in the Central European City,” pp. 36-38, 43; Franz Borkenau
, Austria and After,
p. 160.

30.    Adam Wandruszka, “Osterreichs politische Struktur,” p. 430; Kurt Shell,
The Transformation of Austrian Socialism,
pp. 3-4.

31.    C. A. Macartney,
The Social Revolution in Austria,
p. 142.

32.    Francis Carsten, “Interpretations of Fascism,” p. 420.

33.    Klemens von Klemperer, “Chancellor Seipel and the Crisis of Democracy in Austria ” p. 470; Adolf Hitler, Mein
Kampf,
pp. 47-50.

34.    Charles Gulick,
Austria from Habsburg to Hitler,
1:751.

Chapter U

1.    Paul Molisch,
Geschichte der deutschnationalen Bewegung in Osterreich von ihren Anfangen bis zum Zetfall der Monarchic,
p. 141; Peter Pulzer,
The Rise of Political Anti-Semitism in Germany and Austria
, p. 7.

2.    
Pulzer,
Anti-Semitism,
p. 10.

3.    Leo Goldhammer,
Die Juden Wiens,
p. 9; Franz Borkenau,
Austria and After,
p. 95.

4.    
The World Almanac and Book of Facts,
1929, p. 588.

5.    
Goldhammer,
Juden Wiens,
pp. 39-40;
William Jenks,
Vienna and the Young Hitler,
p. 120.

6
.    Hugo Gold,
Geschichte der Juden in Wien
, p. 36.

7.    Henry Steed,
The Hapsburg Monarchy,
p. 184. See also Robert Schwarz, “Antisemitism and Socialism in Austria, 1918-1962,” p. 446.

8.    
Arthur May,
The Hapsburg Monarchy,
1867-1914
, p. 177.

9.    
Pulzer,
Anti-Semitism,
p. 294.

10.    Herbert Rosenkranz, “The Anschluss and the Tragedy of Austrian Jewry, 1938-1945,” p. 480.

11.    Pulzer,
Anti-Semitism,
pp. 248, 328; Karl Stadler,
Austria,
pp. 138-39.

12.    
Andrew Whiteside, “Austria,”
pp. 310-11.

13.    Ibid., pp. 312-13.

14.    
Karl Wache, “Land und Volk
” p. 33;
Hugo Hantsch,
Die Geschichte

!
Osterreichs,
2:445; Albert Fuchs,
Geistige Strdmungen in Osterreich,
1867-1918,

| P-
¹⁸²
’

:p    15. Quoted in Pulzer,
Anti-Semitism,
p. 153.

j!:i    16. Francis Carsten,
The Rise of Fascism,
p. 34; Fuchs,
Geistige Strdmungen,

|
p.
296, n. 10.

17.    Andrew Whiteside,
The Socialism of Fools,
p. 304.

18.    Ibid., p. 113.

19.    Ibid., pp. 3,308.

20.    Ibid., pp.
6
, 264,280.

21.    F. L. Carsten.
Fascist Movements in Austria,
p. 19; Whiteside,
Socialism of Fools,
pp. 43, 311; Pulzer,
Anti-Semitism,
pp. 279, 281.

22.    Although Schonerer’s followers had long been known as pan-Germans (Alldeutschen) it was not until 1901 that they officially took that name. See Fuchs,
Geistige Strdmungen,
p. 295.

23.    Whiteside,
Socialism of Fools,
pp. 217, 316.

24.    Molisch,
Geschichte der deutschnationalen Bewegung,
pp. 110-11, 153.

25.    C. A. Macartney,
The Habsburg Monarchy,
1790-1918,
pp. 654- 55.

26.    Pulzer,
Anti-Semitism,
p. 207.

27.    Carsten,
Fascist Movements,
p.
21; Molisch,
Geschichte der deutschnationalen Bewegung,
p. 157.

28.    Whiteside,
Socialism of Fools, p.
263.

29.    Ibid., pp. 241,282.

30.    Werner Barth, “Germany and the Anschluss,” pp. 126-27.

31.    
Das Hakenkreuz
, March-April 1926, p. 35; Hans Volz,
Daten der Geschichte der NSDAP,
p.
6
; Carsten,
Fascist Movements,
p. 33.

32.    Rudolf Brandstotter, “Dr. Walter Riehl und die nationalsozialistische Bewegung in Osterreich,” pp. 49,
86
, 109-10, 115; Andrew Whiteside, “The Deutsche Arbeiterpartei, 1904—1918,” p. 5.

33.    Andrew Whiteside, “Reply to the Above Comments,” p. 16.

34.    Both quotations are from M. W. Fodor,
Plot and Counterplot in Central Europe,
p. 163.

35.    
Das Hakenkreuz,
Mar.-Apr, 1926, p. 36; Brandstdtter, “Riehl,” p. 54.

36.    Juan Linz, “Some Notes Toward a Comparative Study of Fascism in Sociological Historical Perspective,” p. 30.

37.    
Austrian National Socialism before
1918,
p. 115.

38.    Brandstotter, “Riehl ” pp. 12-17.

39.    Whiteside, “Deutsche Arbeiterparteip. 9.

40.    Brandstotter, “Riehl,” pp. 119-20, 133, 137-38.

41.    Alois Ciller,
Deutscher Sozialismus in den Sudetenl'ander und der Ostmark,
pp. 136-37, 139.

42.    Max Kele, “The Evolution of Austrian National Socialism from an Indigenous Party to an Appendage of Hitler’s Movement,” p. 3.

43.    “Deutsche Arbeiterpartei,” p. 3.

44.    Kele, “Evolution,” p. 3.

45.    Whiteside,
Austrian National Socialism,
p. 121.

46.    Quoted in Georg Franz-Willing,
Die Hitler bewegung,
1:95. Emphasis by Franz-Willing.

47.    For similarities between Hitler and Riehl see Linzer
Vkst,
20 Aug. 1923, p. 1; Alexander Schilling,
Dr. Walter Riehl und die Geschichte des National Sozialismus,
pp. 96, 352; Hitler,
Mein Kampf,
p. 79; Ciller,
Deutscher Sozialismus,
p. 139; Brandstotter, “Riehl,” p. 19.

48.    For the differences between Hitler and Riehl see Hitler,
Mein Kampf,
p.
102; Schilling,
Walter Riehl,
p. 85; Brandstotter, “Riehl,” pp. 13, 215-16.,

49.    
DAP,
21 Aug. 1920, p. 2.

50.    Ibid., 17 Jan. 1920, p. 3; Konrad Heiden,
Geschichte des Nationalsozialismus,
p. 33.

51.    Wemer Maser,
Die Fruhgeschichte der NSDAP
, p. 243.

52.    4 June 1921, p. 1.

53.    Heiden,
Geschichte des Nationalsozialismus,
p. 34.