What do you think?
Rate this book
Backing Hitler: Consent and Coercion in Nazi Germany
Debate still rages over how much ordinary Germans knew about the concentration camps and the Gestapo's activities during Hitler's reign. Now, in this well-documented and provocative volume, historian Robert Gellately argues that the majority of German citizens had quite a clear picture of the extent of Nazi atrocities, and continued to support the Reich to the bitter end.
Culling chilling evidence from primary news sources and citing dozens of case studies, Gellately shows how media reports and press stories were an essential dimension of Hitler's popular dictatorship. Indeed, a vast array of material on the concentration camps, the violent campaigns against social outsiders, and the Nazis' radical approaches to "law and order" was published in the media of the day, and was widely read by a highly literate population of Germans. Hitler, Gellately reveals, did not try to hide the existence of the Gestapo or of concentration camps. Nor did the Nazis try to cow the people into submission. Instead they set out to win converts by building on popular images, cherished ideals, and long-held phobias. And their efforts succeeded, Gellately concludes, for the Gestapo's monstrous success was due, in large part, to ordinary German citizens who singled out suspected "enemies" in their midst, reporting their suspicions and allegations freely and in a spirit of
cooperation and patriotism.
Extensively documented, highly readable and illustrated with never-before-published photographs, Backing Hitler convincingly debunks the myth that Nazi atrocities were carried out in secret. From the rise of the Third Reich well into the final, desperate months of the war, the destruction of innocent lives was inextricably linked to the will of the German people.
Culling chilling evidence from primary news sources and citing dozens of case studies, Gellately shows how media reports and press stories were an essential dimension of Hitler's popular dictatorship. Indeed, a vast array of material on the concentration camps, the violent campaigns against social outsiders, and the Nazis' radical approaches to "law and order" was published in the media of the day, and was widely read by a highly literate population of Germans. Hitler, Gellately reveals, did not try to hide the existence of the Gestapo or of concentration camps. Nor did the Nazis try to cow the people into submission. Instead they set out to win converts by building on popular images, cherished ideals, and long-held phobias. And their efforts succeeded, Gellately concludes, for the Gestapo's monstrous success was due, in large part, to ordinary German citizens who singled out suspected "enemies" in their midst, reporting their suspicions and allegations freely and in a spirit of
cooperation and patriotism.
Extensively documented, highly readable and illustrated with never-before-published photographs, Backing Hitler convincingly debunks the myth that Nazi atrocities were carried out in secret. From the rise of the Third Reich well into the final, desperate months of the war, the destruction of innocent lives was inextricably linked to the will of the German people.
384 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2001
43 people are currently reading
769 people want to read
About the author
Robert Gellately
14 books40 followersRobert Gellately (born 1943) is a Newfoundland-born Canadian academic who is one of the leading historians of modern Europe, particularly during World War II and the Cold War era. He is Earl Ray Beck Professor of History at Florida State University. He often teaches classes about World War II and the Cold War, but his extensive interest in the Holocaust has led to his conducting research regarding other genocides as well. He is occasionally known to give lectures on specific genocides. Gellately has very strict guidelines for what he will deem a genocide, and has had several televised debates regarding his somewhat controversial views.
Gellately's most recent work is Stalin's Curse: Battling for Communism in War and Cold War (Knopf (March 5, 2013) Gellately recently published a set of original documents by Leon Goldensohn dealing with the 1945-46 Nuremberg trials of war criminals in The Nuremberg Interviews: An American Psychiatrist's Conversations With The Defendants and Witnesses (Alfred A. Knopf, 2004).
His other books include Backing Hitler: Consent and Coercion in Nazi Germany, 1933-1945 (Oxford University Press, 2001). It has been published in German, Dutch, Spanish, Czech, and Italian. Japanese and French translations are in press. Backing Hitler was chosen as a main selection for book clubs in North America and the United Kingdom.
In the book Backing Hitler: Consent and Coercion in Nazi Germany, 1933-1945, Gellately argues that the Gestapo were not in fact all-pervasive and intrusive as they have been described. The Gestapo only numbered 32,000 for the entire population of Germany, and this clearly limited their impact. In the city of Hanover there were only 42 officers. Instead, Gellately says that the atmosphere of terror and fear was maintained by 'denunciations' from ordinary Germans, whereby they would inform any suspicious 'anti-Nazi' activity to the local Nazi authority. According to Gellatley, these denunciations were the cause of most prosecutions, as in Saarbrücken 87.5 per cent of cases of 'slander against the regime' came from denunciations. This diminished the Gestapo's role in maintaining fear and terror throughout the Third Reich, however they still proved to be a powerful instrument for Hitler and continued to provide the security apparatus needed for the Nazi Regime.
His first book was The Politics of Economic Despair: Shopkeepers in German Politics, 1890-1914 (London, 1974). In 1991 he published The Gestapo and German Society: Enforcing Racial Policy, 1933-1945 (Oxford University Press.) It has been translated into German and Spanish.
In addition, Gellately has co-edited a volume of essays with Russian specialist Sheila Fitzpatrick, Accusatory Practices: Denunciation in Modern European History, 1789-1989 (University of Chicago Press, 1997). With his colleague Nathan Stoltzfus (also at Florida State University) he co-edited a collection called Social Outsiders in Nazi Germany (Princeton University Press, 2001). With Ben Kiernan, Director of the Genocide Studies program at Yale, he recently co-edited The Specter of Genocide: Mass Murder in Historical Perspective (Cambridge University Press, 2003).
Professor Gellately has won numerous research awards, including grants from the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation in Germany and the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. Many of the books written or edited by him are used as textbooks in college classrooms across America.
Credits: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_...
Gellately's most recent work is Stalin's Curse: Battling for Communism in War and Cold War (Knopf (March 5, 2013) Gellately recently published a set of original documents by Leon Goldensohn dealing with the 1945-46 Nuremberg trials of war criminals in The Nuremberg Interviews: An American Psychiatrist's Conversations With The Defendants and Witnesses (Alfred A. Knopf, 2004).
His other books include Backing Hitler: Consent and Coercion in Nazi Germany, 1933-1945 (Oxford University Press, 2001). It has been published in German, Dutch, Spanish, Czech, and Italian. Japanese and French translations are in press. Backing Hitler was chosen as a main selection for book clubs in North America and the United Kingdom.
In the book Backing Hitler: Consent and Coercion in Nazi Germany, 1933-1945, Gellately argues that the Gestapo were not in fact all-pervasive and intrusive as they have been described. The Gestapo only numbered 32,000 for the entire population of Germany, and this clearly limited their impact. In the city of Hanover there were only 42 officers. Instead, Gellately says that the atmosphere of terror and fear was maintained by 'denunciations' from ordinary Germans, whereby they would inform any suspicious 'anti-Nazi' activity to the local Nazi authority. According to Gellatley, these denunciations were the cause of most prosecutions, as in Saarbrücken 87.5 per cent of cases of 'slander against the regime' came from denunciations. This diminished the Gestapo's role in maintaining fear and terror throughout the Third Reich, however they still proved to be a powerful instrument for Hitler and continued to provide the security apparatus needed for the Nazi Regime.
His first book was The Politics of Economic Despair: Shopkeepers in German Politics, 1890-1914 (London, 1974). In 1991 he published The Gestapo and German Society: Enforcing Racial Policy, 1933-1945 (Oxford University Press.) It has been translated into German and Spanish.
In addition, Gellately has co-edited a volume of essays with Russian specialist Sheila Fitzpatrick, Accusatory Practices: Denunciation in Modern European History, 1789-1989 (University of Chicago Press, 1997). With his colleague Nathan Stoltzfus (also at Florida State University) he co-edited a collection called Social Outsiders in Nazi Germany (Princeton University Press, 2001). With Ben Kiernan, Director of the Genocide Studies program at Yale, he recently co-edited The Specter of Genocide: Mass Murder in Historical Perspective (Cambridge University Press, 2003).
Professor Gellately has won numerous research awards, including grants from the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation in Germany and the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. Many of the books written or edited by him are used as textbooks in college classrooms across America.
Credits: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_...
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 30 reviews
March 21, 2016
UPDATE 3/21/16 ...
Re-reading the early chapters today, several years after first reading them, confirms my view that Gellately's conclusions about widespread German support for Hitler and the Nazis are unsupported and inexplicable.
When even to criticize the Fuhrer was a crime and dissenters were "disappeared" to concentration camps without charges or a hearing, when a network of informers was created to point police to those not fervent enough in their support of Nazis, how can Gellately claim that most Germans supported Hitler and in fact truly loved him. He cites Nazi election victories without bothering to mention that all other political parties had by then been made illegal and their leaders arrested. Nonsense!
Another point ... Gellately says Hitler reached out (1933) to his Catholic enemies to offer a Concordat. That is so far from the facts others have reported that it is ludicrous. The best evidence is that Hitler made a deal with the Vatican (Pacelli) to trade a Concordat for the votes he needed (for the Enabling Act) to become an absolute dictator. The Vatican denies this but I don't believe them and they are still hiding the documents.
I don't know what Gellately was trying to achieve, but I have downgraded my rating to 1* and will not read the rest of the book.
***
I have so far read only those sections dealing with 1933 and before, which is what I am currently writing about in my novel-in-progress. I will read more later as the novel moves along.
In his introduction, Gellately sets the premise that Hitler was well received in 1933 by most Germans who applauded his goals of "restoring the grandeur of the Reich" and "cleaning out undesirable aliens." He argues that this widespread support for Hitler did not waver substantially until more than a decade later when it was obvious that the war Hitler had sought was clearly lost.
He states that the Nazi regime, while selectively brutal with its chosen enemies, did not create a universal terror for most Germans, and that most Germans supported brutality against people for whom they had little sympathy. He further asserts that a vast array of material regarding the concentration camps was published in the media of the day, and that the German people knew very well what was going on. He does not, at least in the introduction, deal with what the German people knew about the death camps of the 1940s and the mass murder of the Jews.
The most shocking quote so far is from a well-spoken middle class German woman who, looking back, says, "We had wonderful years." The footnote sources this quote to a book by Alison Owings called Frauen: German Women Recall the Third Reich.
Now we'll see what proofs Gellately assembles regarding these premises, which have enormous potential significance to my novel-in-progress.
******
Lew’s comments on Gellately’s Chapter 1 ... “Turning Away From Weimar.”
Gellately’s conclusion is that a huge majority of Germans supported Hitler’s policies and thought Hitler was good for Germany. This is especially damning in light of the evidence Gellately presents. Consider the following, all of which took place during 1933, all of which Germans knew, and despite which they supported Hitler ...
... “In less than six months (after Hitler became Chancellor in January 1933) the Nazis undermined the parliamentary system and had begun the destruction of justice by suspending civil and legal rights.”
... the Nazis won more than 80-90% of the vote, after eliminating all opposition parties.
... German police were increasingly empowered to act without restraint, but those who were “good Germans” knew they had nothing to fear.
... the Nazis trashed their opponents without restraint.
... “dead bodies were found in the surrounding forests, and no one dared to know anything about them.”
... “news published about the stream of people sent to concentration camps provided an obvious lesson to any potential opponents”
... “inequality before the law was an essential feature of justice under Hitler’s dictatorship.”
... new laws expanding the meaning of treason and setting up a People’s Court to mete out justice to offenders.”
... Germans accepted that their country would have a secret police.
... “the paramilitary SA, millions-strong, indulged in vigilante acts of violence that totally ignored the law.”
... Jews were systematically turned into outsiders with their legal emancipation reversed.
... Jews were driven from the professions, and “it appears beyond doubt that their expulsion was popular,” at least in part because it created employment opportunities for Christian Germans.
... doctors’ organizations were brought under Nazi control and Jews barred ... “there was virtually no opposition to what happened.”
To me, there seems to be a huge disconnect between what the German people knew about Hitler’s approach and their wholehearted support of their new Fuhrer.
What kind of people, understanding what Hitler and his thugs did to those they classified enemies, and how easily and without appeal it was possible to become one of those enemies, and how Hitler had totally co-opted the police, the courts, the press, and the Catholic Church, would still support such a brutal leader?
I guess we must conclude (a) they didn’t care about the people Hitler was persecuting and (b) they didn’t think it would happen to them.
Also, to be fair, 1933 was also almost a decade before the mechanized mass murder of the Jews at Auschwitz and elsewhere, so support of Hitler in 1933, awful as his policies were even then, does not yet mean support for the death camps of the 1940s. Gellately’s views on whether the German people also supported the Holocaust are, I expect, dealt with in subsequent chapters.
******
Lew's comments on Gellately’s Chapter 2 - Police Justice
It is getting harder for me to reconcile the horrors of the totalitarian state graphically described by Gellately with his contention that “a huge majority of Germans supported Hitler’s policies and thought Hitler was good for Germany.” For one thing, as the net of repressive and arbitrary police procedures grew ever tighter, how is it possible to know if the German people continued to support Hitler or were terrified not to support him?
A review of "Backing Hitler" by Professor Conan Fischer, cites a prior book by Gellately, "The Gestapo and German Society: Enforcing Racial Policy 1933-1945" as demonstrating conclusively “that the much feared and allegedly omnipresent Gestapo in fact relied on widespread public support to function effectively. Denunciations of fellow citizens and relatives by members of the public initiated many Gestapo investigations, even though the whistleblowers understood that those denounced could suffer torture, be consigned to an uncertain fate in a concentration camp, or be executed without due legal process.”
To me this statement, and Gellately’s identical contention in "Backing Hitler," flies in the face of common sense. In a world where the police can detain anyone in “protective custody” for “public criticism of the government or the Nazi Party, even if the remarks were made in private,” how could any denunciation of one citizen by another be construed as an expression of support for the regime, when it is far more likely to be a desperate effort to prevent one’s own denunciation for failing to denounce a fellow-citizen’s “crime?”
In a chapter where Nazi police are described as adopting a “preventive role, by which they meant arbitrarily arresting people who the police thought might commit a crime,” how is it possible to believe that any German citizen felt secure? How could any German be thought to support such a regime, no matter how much they publicly insisted they did?
These questions lead to other questions ...
... Are those Germans who quite appropriately feared for their lives excused from culpability for the actions of a nightmarish government they outwardly professed to support?
... Who had the power and moral authority to combat such a regime from within or from without?
... Who could have acted but didn’t?
... And why does Gellately continue to insist that “a huge majority of Germans supported Hitler’s policies and thought Hitler was good for Germany?”
I’ll keep reading and looking for evidence that has not yet been provided ... all the while trying to figure out how I will present these questions and choices in my new novel.
Re-reading the early chapters today, several years after first reading them, confirms my view that Gellately's conclusions about widespread German support for Hitler and the Nazis are unsupported and inexplicable.
When even to criticize the Fuhrer was a crime and dissenters were "disappeared" to concentration camps without charges or a hearing, when a network of informers was created to point police to those not fervent enough in their support of Nazis, how can Gellately claim that most Germans supported Hitler and in fact truly loved him. He cites Nazi election victories without bothering to mention that all other political parties had by then been made illegal and their leaders arrested. Nonsense!
Another point ... Gellately says Hitler reached out (1933) to his Catholic enemies to offer a Concordat. That is so far from the facts others have reported that it is ludicrous. The best evidence is that Hitler made a deal with the Vatican (Pacelli) to trade a Concordat for the votes he needed (for the Enabling Act) to become an absolute dictator. The Vatican denies this but I don't believe them and they are still hiding the documents.
I don't know what Gellately was trying to achieve, but I have downgraded my rating to 1* and will not read the rest of the book.
***
I have so far read only those sections dealing with 1933 and before, which is what I am currently writing about in my novel-in-progress. I will read more later as the novel moves along.
In his introduction, Gellately sets the premise that Hitler was well received in 1933 by most Germans who applauded his goals of "restoring the grandeur of the Reich" and "cleaning out undesirable aliens." He argues that this widespread support for Hitler did not waver substantially until more than a decade later when it was obvious that the war Hitler had sought was clearly lost.
He states that the Nazi regime, while selectively brutal with its chosen enemies, did not create a universal terror for most Germans, and that most Germans supported brutality against people for whom they had little sympathy. He further asserts that a vast array of material regarding the concentration camps was published in the media of the day, and that the German people knew very well what was going on. He does not, at least in the introduction, deal with what the German people knew about the death camps of the 1940s and the mass murder of the Jews.
The most shocking quote so far is from a well-spoken middle class German woman who, looking back, says, "We had wonderful years." The footnote sources this quote to a book by Alison Owings called Frauen: German Women Recall the Third Reich.
Now we'll see what proofs Gellately assembles regarding these premises, which have enormous potential significance to my novel-in-progress.
******
Lew’s comments on Gellately’s Chapter 1 ... “Turning Away From Weimar.”
Gellately’s conclusion is that a huge majority of Germans supported Hitler’s policies and thought Hitler was good for Germany. This is especially damning in light of the evidence Gellately presents. Consider the following, all of which took place during 1933, all of which Germans knew, and despite which they supported Hitler ...
... “In less than six months (after Hitler became Chancellor in January 1933) the Nazis undermined the parliamentary system and had begun the destruction of justice by suspending civil and legal rights.”
... the Nazis won more than 80-90% of the vote, after eliminating all opposition parties.
... German police were increasingly empowered to act without restraint, but those who were “good Germans” knew they had nothing to fear.
... the Nazis trashed their opponents without restraint.
... “dead bodies were found in the surrounding forests, and no one dared to know anything about them.”
... “news published about the stream of people sent to concentration camps provided an obvious lesson to any potential opponents”
... “inequality before the law was an essential feature of justice under Hitler’s dictatorship.”
... new laws expanding the meaning of treason and setting up a People’s Court to mete out justice to offenders.”
... Germans accepted that their country would have a secret police.
... “the paramilitary SA, millions-strong, indulged in vigilante acts of violence that totally ignored the law.”
... Jews were systematically turned into outsiders with their legal emancipation reversed.
... Jews were driven from the professions, and “it appears beyond doubt that their expulsion was popular,” at least in part because it created employment opportunities for Christian Germans.
... doctors’ organizations were brought under Nazi control and Jews barred ... “there was virtually no opposition to what happened.”
To me, there seems to be a huge disconnect between what the German people knew about Hitler’s approach and their wholehearted support of their new Fuhrer.
What kind of people, understanding what Hitler and his thugs did to those they classified enemies, and how easily and without appeal it was possible to become one of those enemies, and how Hitler had totally co-opted the police, the courts, the press, and the Catholic Church, would still support such a brutal leader?
I guess we must conclude (a) they didn’t care about the people Hitler was persecuting and (b) they didn’t think it would happen to them.
Also, to be fair, 1933 was also almost a decade before the mechanized mass murder of the Jews at Auschwitz and elsewhere, so support of Hitler in 1933, awful as his policies were even then, does not yet mean support for the death camps of the 1940s. Gellately’s views on whether the German people also supported the Holocaust are, I expect, dealt with in subsequent chapters.
******
Lew's comments on Gellately’s Chapter 2 - Police Justice
It is getting harder for me to reconcile the horrors of the totalitarian state graphically described by Gellately with his contention that “a huge majority of Germans supported Hitler’s policies and thought Hitler was good for Germany.” For one thing, as the net of repressive and arbitrary police procedures grew ever tighter, how is it possible to know if the German people continued to support Hitler or were terrified not to support him?
A review of "Backing Hitler" by Professor Conan Fischer, cites a prior book by Gellately, "The Gestapo and German Society: Enforcing Racial Policy 1933-1945" as demonstrating conclusively “that the much feared and allegedly omnipresent Gestapo in fact relied on widespread public support to function effectively. Denunciations of fellow citizens and relatives by members of the public initiated many Gestapo investigations, even though the whistleblowers understood that those denounced could suffer torture, be consigned to an uncertain fate in a concentration camp, or be executed without due legal process.”
To me this statement, and Gellately’s identical contention in "Backing Hitler," flies in the face of common sense. In a world where the police can detain anyone in “protective custody” for “public criticism of the government or the Nazi Party, even if the remarks were made in private,” how could any denunciation of one citizen by another be construed as an expression of support for the regime, when it is far more likely to be a desperate effort to prevent one’s own denunciation for failing to denounce a fellow-citizen’s “crime?”
In a chapter where Nazi police are described as adopting a “preventive role, by which they meant arbitrarily arresting people who the police thought might commit a crime,” how is it possible to believe that any German citizen felt secure? How could any German be thought to support such a regime, no matter how much they publicly insisted they did?
These questions lead to other questions ...
... Are those Germans who quite appropriately feared for their lives excused from culpability for the actions of a nightmarish government they outwardly professed to support?
... Who had the power and moral authority to combat such a regime from within or from without?
... Who could have acted but didn’t?
... And why does Gellately continue to insist that “a huge majority of Germans supported Hitler’s policies and thought Hitler was good for Germany?”
I’ll keep reading and looking for evidence that has not yet been provided ... all the while trying to figure out how I will present these questions and choices in my new novel.
June 1, 2013
This book raises some significant issues on Hitler’s reign over Nazi Germany. For instance the author makes good points (and provides examples) on denunciations which were volunteered by ordinary German citizens. Most of the people of the Third Reich were never cowed by the police apparatus and would eagerly point out – mostly by writing - suspects who were not compliant with the regime. Often these denunciations were not altruistic and could often lead to severe results – incarceration and/or execution.
The focus of the book is on the legal apparatus, and how justice became more and more arbitrary with little rights to the accused. By using this perspective the emphasis is more on coercion than consent.
The constant referring to legal examples at times makes the book rather dry. Also much of the data and examples cited on concentration camps are available in other books on Nazi Germany.
The author also brings out that the presence of millions of foreign workers and their brutal camp system was very visible across the Nazi state. However there was virtually nothing on what the German soldiers on the Eastern Front related to their family, friends and relatives about the atrocities they may have participated in and certainly witnessed in the Soviet Union and Poland.
There are still many unanswered issues on consent. Why did the German people take so readily to the leadership principal? Fuehrer means “leader” – in no other Western country do the people refer to their political heads of state in such a fashion. Why did the German people love him so much, and follow Hitler into the apocalypse? Although the role of women is examined little was said about the almost sexual adoration they had for their beloved Fuehrer.
As Mr. Gellately points out in his conclusion - will we ever know why and how they came to accept this level of brutality. I did find different answers in Daniel Jonah Goldhagen’s Hitler's Willing Executioners: Ordinary Germans and the Holocaust. Even during the 1930’s by listening to and reading the hate-filled speeches on Jews , on Communism, on the liberal democracies – why were the German people so swept up to support the Nazi revolution?
The focus of the book is on the legal apparatus, and how justice became more and more arbitrary with little rights to the accused. By using this perspective the emphasis is more on coercion than consent.
The constant referring to legal examples at times makes the book rather dry. Also much of the data and examples cited on concentration camps are available in other books on Nazi Germany.
The author also brings out that the presence of millions of foreign workers and their brutal camp system was very visible across the Nazi state. However there was virtually nothing on what the German soldiers on the Eastern Front related to their family, friends and relatives about the atrocities they may have participated in and certainly witnessed in the Soviet Union and Poland.
There are still many unanswered issues on consent. Why did the German people take so readily to the leadership principal? Fuehrer means “leader” – in no other Western country do the people refer to their political heads of state in such a fashion. Why did the German people love him so much, and follow Hitler into the apocalypse? Although the role of women is examined little was said about the almost sexual adoration they had for their beloved Fuehrer.
As Mr. Gellately points out in his conclusion - will we ever know why and how they came to accept this level of brutality. I did find different answers in Daniel Jonah Goldhagen’s Hitler's Willing Executioners: Ordinary Germans and the Holocaust. Even during the 1930’s by listening to and reading the hate-filled speeches on Jews , on Communism, on the liberal democracies – why were the German people so swept up to support the Nazi revolution?
July 29, 2016
When I reached 75, I promised myself never to read another short story, novel, or nonfiction about the Holocaust. Having read Hitler's Willing Executioners, I thought I'd learned it all, and who needs the grief?
Then, whilst reading on my NOOK, I mentioned that book to a visitor. When I called it up, Backing Hitler:Consent and Coercion in Nazi Germany came up as "People who like this..." My finger tapped on it, and this book began to download.
Robert Gellately's writing grabs your attention and his studies grab your guts. You may think you know all about the Shoah, but, believe me, you don't. Gellately has done in depth what, apparently, nobody ever thought of before:trawling newspapers from Hitler's rise to the Allies at the gates in April 1945. He does not discuss only the Jews, but the Poles, Jehovah's Witnesses and the myriad others sent to the camps. Being a bona fide Aryan didn't mean you were safe, either from being killed or deported. All persons could be dispatched without any evidence. If you rail against the lengthy trials and legal niceties in the USA, read what happens when a society forfeits the right to a fair trial. The Germans did that willingly. In fact, given that outright lies and false charges were investigated by the Gestapo, Germans indulged in a frenzy of denouncing their friends, neighbor, and spouses throughout Hitler's reign. Interestingly, for the most part, the Gestapo waited for citizen denouncements to arrest people. They were not proactive in searching out forbidden activities.
It wasn't just Nazi Party members who sabotaged justice. It was ordinary citizens. Thus, they collided with the Nazis to maintain a repressive and unjust society
Gellately's not only read the daily newspapers circulating in Germany from 1993-1945, he examined Gestapo files. The ordinary citizen learned a lot of what the Nazis were doing by glowing reports in the papers.
After the War, I met German students and academics who all said they didn't know about the camps. How could they not? Gellately' examines the numbers of camps in Germany. They were built on the outskirts of major cities and towns. Moreover, their prisoners were used for slave labor in those places. People saw them in their striped garb, often being brutalized by guards. They knew about the camps. They couldn't not have known. Again by their denunciations of others, they colluded with the camp system. They deliberately denounced people, knowing they'd be sent to the camps often with no evidence. Be grateful for the hearsay bans in American courts
Gallately researched the camps themselves. They weren't just Dachau, Auschwitz, and other well known sites. There were hundreds of camps, all in and around cities. And, each camp spawned sub-camps, as many as 50, even 100. They supplied the labor for the German war machines and farms . Yes, the Germans knew.
The most shocking--and affecting-- chapter showed that when German defeat was nigh, on orders from Himmler, the prison guards and overseers indulged in a frenzy of accelerated killings. When they couldn't kill fast enough, they took prisoners on death marches, summarily shooting anyone who lagged behind. In full view of citizens, they would beat people to death for no reason. Actually, there was a reason: Hitler's regime gave license to sadists and other depraved people.
The question for me still remains of how a highly educated and cultured society could be turned into beasts if their government condones it. Not only condones, but urged it. Gallately can't answer that. Nor can I
Then, whilst reading on my NOOK, I mentioned that book to a visitor. When I called it up, Backing Hitler:Consent and Coercion in Nazi Germany came up as "People who like this..." My finger tapped on it, and this book began to download.
Robert Gellately's writing grabs your attention and his studies grab your guts. You may think you know all about the Shoah, but, believe me, you don't. Gellately has done in depth what, apparently, nobody ever thought of before:trawling newspapers from Hitler's rise to the Allies at the gates in April 1945. He does not discuss only the Jews, but the Poles, Jehovah's Witnesses and the myriad others sent to the camps. Being a bona fide Aryan didn't mean you were safe, either from being killed or deported. All persons could be dispatched without any evidence. If you rail against the lengthy trials and legal niceties in the USA, read what happens when a society forfeits the right to a fair trial. The Germans did that willingly. In fact, given that outright lies and false charges were investigated by the Gestapo, Germans indulged in a frenzy of denouncing their friends, neighbor, and spouses throughout Hitler's reign. Interestingly, for the most part, the Gestapo waited for citizen denouncements to arrest people. They were not proactive in searching out forbidden activities.
It wasn't just Nazi Party members who sabotaged justice. It was ordinary citizens. Thus, they collided with the Nazis to maintain a repressive and unjust society
Gellately's not only read the daily newspapers circulating in Germany from 1993-1945, he examined Gestapo files. The ordinary citizen learned a lot of what the Nazis were doing by glowing reports in the papers.
After the War, I met German students and academics who all said they didn't know about the camps. How could they not? Gellately' examines the numbers of camps in Germany. They were built on the outskirts of major cities and towns. Moreover, their prisoners were used for slave labor in those places. People saw them in their striped garb, often being brutalized by guards. They knew about the camps. They couldn't not have known. Again by their denunciations of others, they colluded with the camp system. They deliberately denounced people, knowing they'd be sent to the camps often with no evidence. Be grateful for the hearsay bans in American courts
Gallately researched the camps themselves. They weren't just Dachau, Auschwitz, and other well known sites. There were hundreds of camps, all in and around cities. And, each camp spawned sub-camps, as many as 50, even 100. They supplied the labor for the German war machines and farms . Yes, the Germans knew.
The most shocking--and affecting-- chapter showed that when German defeat was nigh, on orders from Himmler, the prison guards and overseers indulged in a frenzy of accelerated killings. When they couldn't kill fast enough, they took prisoners on death marches, summarily shooting anyone who lagged behind. In full view of citizens, they would beat people to death for no reason. Actually, there was a reason: Hitler's regime gave license to sadists and other depraved people.
The question for me still remains of how a highly educated and cultured society could be turned into beasts if their government condones it. Not only condones, but urged it. Gallately can't answer that. Nor can I
June 29, 2023
This is an important book. Thorough, concise, objective, highly informed by primary sources, Gellately focuses mostly on Germany and shows that, for the most part, the consensus and support of the regime held to the very end. It is persuasive and sobering and never dull — even for one who has read widely on the topic.
April 6, 2008
Don't misread my rather low rating - the argument put forward in this book is both revealing and fascinating, and the research is impeccable.
So why only two stars?
My problem was that while the content was first rate, this book really is a chore to read. Gellately's writing is incredibly tedious and just fails to immerse you in what is both a very interesting subject and the fascinating revelations of his own research. A real pity.
So why only two stars?
My problem was that while the content was first rate, this book really is a chore to read. Gellately's writing is incredibly tedious and just fails to immerse you in what is both a very interesting subject and the fascinating revelations of his own research. A real pity.
April 25, 2024
Look, I know how painstaking the process of historical/academic writing is. And overall, I thought the arguments put forth were coherent and structured, many of the primary sources were novel, and I generally agreed with most of the evidence. I would likely even recommend this book to my WW2 chums. Unfortunately, I had to pry my eyelids open to finish this book. It's dense. Dense, dense, dense. I do not hold the opinion that history should entertain, but Lord have mercy I just couldn't stay awake reading this. There was also this semi-annoying thread of ambiguity woven throughout the book which is not what I personally enjoy in works detailing public consent for murderous, dictatorial regimes.
March 21, 2012
While the information itself is fascinating and eye-opening, the author's diction and how he presents his research is horribly dry and cannot be forced down this reader's eyesockets, so to speak.
October 15, 2021
Um livro com muita informação e que, ao seu final, nos deixa com mais dúvidas do que certezas. Isso não é um problema, necessariamente. Isso se dá pela dificuldade natural com que se interpretam as fontes. Um exemplo: os plebiscitos levados a cabo pelo regime. Em que medida são indicadores confiáveis de consentimento que se dava ao nazismo? Difícil dizer que não teria havido fraude ou, ainda, que o próprio resultado não implicava a realidade, haja vista que votos brancos e nulos (segundo o próprio autor) eram contabilizados favoravelmente aos nazistas.
É de se levar em conta, também, que o consentimento seguramente foi influenciado pela crescente destruição de quaisquer outras instituições da sociedade civil, Igreja católica inclusa. Foi o caso, por exemplo, citado pelo autor de lei que tinha a intenção de atingir membros do Partido do Centro (já extinto no momento da promulgação da lei), que era ligado à Igreja católica.
Ao mesmo tempo, a repressão inegavelmente representou um papel decisivo. Campos de concentração – isto é – grosseiramente qualquer tipo de lugar destinado à reclusão extralegal por tempo indeterminado – se iniciaram até de um modo improvisado, logo após a tomada do poder pelos nazistas. Sendo um sistema extralegal, qualquer tipo de abuso em um campo de concentração – inclusive tortura, fome, assassinato de prisioneiros – era rotineiros.
Além disso, o controle dos campos estava além do judiciário. A polícia estava acima das decisões de cortes legais. Um outro ponto que me parece interessante é que de início esses campos de concentração – que nunca deixaram de existir – estavam mais destinados aos comunistas e opositores políticos.
Também um elemento importante do livro diz respeito ao ‘sistema legal’. Em um certo sentido, não me parece errado dizer que era o nazismo era um estado sem lei, ou melhor, um estado em que a fonte do sistema jurídico estava fora da norma legal.
Muitas vezes, há uma certa confusão quando se olha para o nazismo em razão da enorme quantidade documental que o regime produzia. Uma papelada sem fim. Porém, as regras derivavam da vontade arbitrária de seus líderes. Atenção, por exemplo, ao caso em que o ministro da justiça justifica a um juiz o programa de extermínio T-4 (assassinato de pessoas com deficiência) em razão de uma carta de Hitler. Ao contrário do que aconteceu na União Soviética, em que havia um simulacro de sistema legal (Constituição, códigos), os nazistas não se preocupavam com isso: não houve uma constituição nazista ou sequer um código criminal. Só essa análise a respeito do sistema ‘jurídico’ nazista já vale o livro. Muitas fontes e muita pesquisa feita pelo autor. Isso me parece importante porque se criou esse mito de que os nazismo seria um exemplo de positivismo jurídico. Na verdade, se confunde burocracia com norma jurídica.
Por fim, destaque para o comportamento do que aconteceu nos últimos dias do regime. Muitos casos de execução sumária ou execução a sangue frio daqueles que cogitavam se render. Muitos casos assim no oeste, à medida em que os americanos se aproximavam. Essa talvez seja a forma extrema de consentimento. Mesmo nos momentos finais, havia pessoas comuns que se recusavam sequer a negociar a rendição.
Enfim, um livro com um tremendo manancial de informações.
É de se levar em conta, também, que o consentimento seguramente foi influenciado pela crescente destruição de quaisquer outras instituições da sociedade civil, Igreja católica inclusa. Foi o caso, por exemplo, citado pelo autor de lei que tinha a intenção de atingir membros do Partido do Centro (já extinto no momento da promulgação da lei), que era ligado à Igreja católica.
Ao mesmo tempo, a repressão inegavelmente representou um papel decisivo. Campos de concentração – isto é – grosseiramente qualquer tipo de lugar destinado à reclusão extralegal por tempo indeterminado – se iniciaram até de um modo improvisado, logo após a tomada do poder pelos nazistas. Sendo um sistema extralegal, qualquer tipo de abuso em um campo de concentração – inclusive tortura, fome, assassinato de prisioneiros – era rotineiros.
Além disso, o controle dos campos estava além do judiciário. A polícia estava acima das decisões de cortes legais. Um outro ponto que me parece interessante é que de início esses campos de concentração – que nunca deixaram de existir – estavam mais destinados aos comunistas e opositores políticos.
Também um elemento importante do livro diz respeito ao ‘sistema legal’. Em um certo sentido, não me parece errado dizer que era o nazismo era um estado sem lei, ou melhor, um estado em que a fonte do sistema jurídico estava fora da norma legal.
Muitas vezes, há uma certa confusão quando se olha para o nazismo em razão da enorme quantidade documental que o regime produzia. Uma papelada sem fim. Porém, as regras derivavam da vontade arbitrária de seus líderes. Atenção, por exemplo, ao caso em que o ministro da justiça justifica a um juiz o programa de extermínio T-4 (assassinato de pessoas com deficiência) em razão de uma carta de Hitler. Ao contrário do que aconteceu na União Soviética, em que havia um simulacro de sistema legal (Constituição, códigos), os nazistas não se preocupavam com isso: não houve uma constituição nazista ou sequer um código criminal. Só essa análise a respeito do sistema ‘jurídico’ nazista já vale o livro. Muitas fontes e muita pesquisa feita pelo autor. Isso me parece importante porque se criou esse mito de que os nazismo seria um exemplo de positivismo jurídico. Na verdade, se confunde burocracia com norma jurídica.
Por fim, destaque para o comportamento do que aconteceu nos últimos dias do regime. Muitos casos de execução sumária ou execução a sangue frio daqueles que cogitavam se render. Muitos casos assim no oeste, à medida em que os americanos se aproximavam. Essa talvez seja a forma extrema de consentimento. Mesmo nos momentos finais, havia pessoas comuns que se recusavam sequer a negociar a rendição.
Enfim, um livro com um tremendo manancial de informações.
March 4, 2024
Crazy how well propaganda works
January 6, 2018
Er is duidelijk veel onderzoek en tijd in het boek gestoken. Toch vind ik de titel op de achterflap en de vraag die Gellately zelf overigens ook zegt te zullen beantwoorden ("in hoeverre was het Duitse volk op de hoogte van de misdaden van de Nazi's?") enigszins misleidend.
Het boek is een zeer uitgebreide studie naar de Nazi misdaden zelf en in dat opzicht erg waardevol, maar is vaak erg kort over de mate waarin dit bij het publiek bekend was / bekend zou kunnen zijn.
Erg wetenschappelijk geschreven en bijvoorbeeld als secundaire bron bij onderzoek mogelijk erg nuttig.
Het boek is een zeer uitgebreide studie naar de Nazi misdaden zelf en in dat opzicht erg waardevol, maar is vaak erg kort over de mate waarin dit bij het publiek bekend was / bekend zou kunnen zijn.
Erg wetenschappelijk geschreven en bijvoorbeeld als secundaire bron bij onderzoek mogelijk erg nuttig.
March 25, 2024
Good book overall and the author has lots of really great points. And he did not need 600 pages to say it, he makes his points in less than 300. (I write brief and to the point myself). One of the most important is this: 75% of the cases the Gestapo investigated came from denunciations by ordinary citizens. Germans were only too happy to inform on friends, neighbors and even family members. The Third Reich was very well supported by the people. They knew about the camps, but probably not that the new camps in Poland were another thing entirely.
PHIL
PHIL
February 13, 2012
If you want to have a stake in your future or understand how people can allow despots to rule take time to read Gellately's from-the-German-archives-public-records that show 1 in 7 German citizens were the eyes and ears for the Stasi upon their own family members as well as their neighbors. "See something, say something."?
December 18, 2019
In Backing Hitler, Robert Gellately shows us what a true police state looks like. The police state as it emerged in Nazi Germany starting in 1933 was very extreme, as is widely known. But there is much to learn by examining the details and coming to understand the dynamics of its operation and development.
Gellately’s initial theme has to do with Nazi concern for public opinion. Even while the Gestapo and other police organizations were on the rise, while police were increasingly given new authority to convict and punish without involving the courts, and while the courts were constantly under pressure to hand out only the stiffest of penalties, and the vast network of concentration camps was established and individual rights were on the steep decline, it was not terror alone that the Nazis utilized to gain domestic control. The Nazis were always concerned with public opinion, and to that end Nazi propaganda took shape. Hitler and his minions were always careful not to cross certain lines that the public might have a problem with, and were careful to justify their actions in the press. The extent to which the public bought into the Nazi racist and political propaganda over time was very extreme, and this was achieved through careful consideration of public relations.
Understanding the true nature of life in Nazi Germany has many purposes, and Backing Hitler sheds light on each of them, even those it does not directly address. It tells us who the victims were - and there were many different groups that suffered at the Nazis’ hands. The first were the opposing political leaders, especially the socialists and communists. The two socialist parties in Germany in 1933 together represented a majority. Things might have gone differently in Germany had these two parties been able to get along with each other. But when Hitler took over in 1933 the opposing political leaders were the first to see the inside of a camp. Later there was the rounding up of many under the Nazi racial ideology which included Poles and other Slavs, and of course there was always special treatment for the Jews. But the persecution was not just based on political and racial concerns. As the war progressed ideological purity was stressed it became illegal to listen to foreign radio broadcasts, and many were arrested for saying things, even in private, against the government or the army, even for saying anything pessimistic about the war. And so many Germans were arrested and put in the camps alongside Jews and Poles and so forth. And most Germans who were arrested had been turned in to the police by co-workers, neighbors, and even family members in response to calls for citizens to police those around them. Understanding the attack on human rights in the police state known as Nazi Germany helps us understand the complete nightmare that existed for anyone who held on to any sense of human decency.
Continued on Amazon.
Gellately’s initial theme has to do with Nazi concern for public opinion. Even while the Gestapo and other police organizations were on the rise, while police were increasingly given new authority to convict and punish without involving the courts, and while the courts were constantly under pressure to hand out only the stiffest of penalties, and the vast network of concentration camps was established and individual rights were on the steep decline, it was not terror alone that the Nazis utilized to gain domestic control. The Nazis were always concerned with public opinion, and to that end Nazi propaganda took shape. Hitler and his minions were always careful not to cross certain lines that the public might have a problem with, and were careful to justify their actions in the press. The extent to which the public bought into the Nazi racist and political propaganda over time was very extreme, and this was achieved through careful consideration of public relations.
Understanding the true nature of life in Nazi Germany has many purposes, and Backing Hitler sheds light on each of them, even those it does not directly address. It tells us who the victims were - and there were many different groups that suffered at the Nazis’ hands. The first were the opposing political leaders, especially the socialists and communists. The two socialist parties in Germany in 1933 together represented a majority. Things might have gone differently in Germany had these two parties been able to get along with each other. But when Hitler took over in 1933 the opposing political leaders were the first to see the inside of a camp. Later there was the rounding up of many under the Nazi racial ideology which included Poles and other Slavs, and of course there was always special treatment for the Jews. But the persecution was not just based on political and racial concerns. As the war progressed ideological purity was stressed it became illegal to listen to foreign radio broadcasts, and many were arrested for saying things, even in private, against the government or the army, even for saying anything pessimistic about the war. And so many Germans were arrested and put in the camps alongside Jews and Poles and so forth. And most Germans who were arrested had been turned in to the police by co-workers, neighbors, and even family members in response to calls for citizens to police those around them. Understanding the attack on human rights in the police state known as Nazi Germany helps us understand the complete nightmare that existed for anyone who held on to any sense of human decency.
Continued on Amazon.
September 22, 2018
Germans welcomed Hitler’s ascension to power in January 1933 when the Great Depression was ravaging Germany. People lost money, jobs and, for those who suicided, their lives. The Weimar Republic, proclaimed in 1919, was borne out of revolution and wasn’t supported by most of the major political parties. The democratic government seemed powerless to stop the suffering. Gellately argues the promise of stability, harmony and prosperity fulfilled the yearning of many Germans.
The Nazis governed Germany through consensus and coercion. Germans knew their government was brutal – from the outset. Gellately’s intensive research of local, regional and national newspapers shows they reported the regime’s brutality, albeit in a positive light. Concentration camps were to rehabilitate hardened criminals by giving them a regime of discipline and work. The previous government was soft on crime but now criminals were off the streets.
Gellately draws on the diaries of Jew Victor Klemperer who wrote people looked the other way as authorities deprived Jews of rights and, ultimately, life.
Gellately is among the many historians who deems the Weimar Republic a failure. The argument’s flaw is millions of Germans voted for republican-supporting parties up to and including the last free election in November 1932. These were the same people whose lives were decimated by the economic crisis, yet they held true to the republic’s democratic and human rights ideals.
Backing Hitler is a comprehensive account of the lead-up to Hitler’s appointment as Chancellor of Germany and beyond. It’s easy to judge Germans for looking the other way but today it isn’t just fascist governments denying human rights and dispensing cruelty. Democratic governments also are administering similar policies of cruelty, exclusion and punishment of the innocent. Some of these countries were among the Allies during World War Two.
The Nazis governed Germany through consensus and coercion. Germans knew their government was brutal – from the outset. Gellately’s intensive research of local, regional and national newspapers shows they reported the regime’s brutality, albeit in a positive light. Concentration camps were to rehabilitate hardened criminals by giving them a regime of discipline and work. The previous government was soft on crime but now criminals were off the streets.
Gellately draws on the diaries of Jew Victor Klemperer who wrote people looked the other way as authorities deprived Jews of rights and, ultimately, life.
Gellately is among the many historians who deems the Weimar Republic a failure. The argument’s flaw is millions of Germans voted for republican-supporting parties up to and including the last free election in November 1932. These were the same people whose lives were decimated by the economic crisis, yet they held true to the republic’s democratic and human rights ideals.
Backing Hitler is a comprehensive account of the lead-up to Hitler’s appointment as Chancellor of Germany and beyond. It’s easy to judge Germans for looking the other way but today it isn’t just fascist governments denying human rights and dispensing cruelty. Democratic governments also are administering similar policies of cruelty, exclusion and punishment of the innocent. Some of these countries were among the Allies during World War Two.
March 30, 2024
Provocative book suggesting regular Germans knew quite well what the government was up to throughout the time of the Third Reich. The author does a great job of showing how the Nazi party is able to slowly inject antisemitism into the societies mass conscience. What starts as an anti semitic party preaching law and order and police autonomy, evolves into a police state where the police is judge jury and executioner.
The thing that was more disturbing was how mass society by in large acquiesced to Nazi party ideology. There was a large portion of the German society that thought Hitler was a buffoon parading around in his brown uniform and his silly arm band. There was a population that bought the Hitler message hook, line and sinker who ultimately elected him. It’s scary what a well organized, disgruntled minority can accomplish.
Capitalism also seemed to do quite well in Hitler’s Germany, companies such as Siemens, IG Faben, Krupp Steel, BMW, Volkswagen and the list goes on and on we’re direct beneficiaries of slave labor provided by the SS. It really underscores the fact that totalitarianism and capitalism can peacefully coexist.
I also found it very interesting how ordinary Germans were so inclined to denounce one another to settle scores such as failed relationships, landlord/tenant or even family disputes. Obviously, people in these relationships are disgruntled but denouncing to the Gestapo?? Perhaps, it also shows how violent the German culture had become in the Nazi period.
On a cautionary note to the reader, I found this book difficult to stay engaged with. I think the writing could have flowed better, hence 4 stars.
The thing that was more disturbing was how mass society by in large acquiesced to Nazi party ideology. There was a large portion of the German society that thought Hitler was a buffoon parading around in his brown uniform and his silly arm band. There was a population that bought the Hitler message hook, line and sinker who ultimately elected him. It’s scary what a well organized, disgruntled minority can accomplish.
Capitalism also seemed to do quite well in Hitler’s Germany, companies such as Siemens, IG Faben, Krupp Steel, BMW, Volkswagen and the list goes on and on we’re direct beneficiaries of slave labor provided by the SS. It really underscores the fact that totalitarianism and capitalism can peacefully coexist.
I also found it very interesting how ordinary Germans were so inclined to denounce one another to settle scores such as failed relationships, landlord/tenant or even family disputes. Obviously, people in these relationships are disgruntled but denouncing to the Gestapo?? Perhaps, it also shows how violent the German culture had become in the Nazi period.
On a cautionary note to the reader, I found this book difficult to stay engaged with. I think the writing could have flowed better, hence 4 stars.
July 17, 2022
The arguments in this book are interesting and seem very well backed by research and references. I'm not sure if he ever really proposes properly why bother making a book like this. I'm all for true clarity and understanding of history, and for that I appreciate what I gained from this book, but most people pursue something like this with an end goal in mind and I couldn't see how this helped in the pursuit of anything. Oh well. As the reader, that isn't my problem to tackle. The low rating for this book is not for the subject, but for the writing. It is not very engaging (as others have pointed out) but it is also very repetitive. On many occasions a sentence or argument will be stated in neighboring paragraphs, to the extent that I would some times get confused and think that I had accidently resumed my reading on a previously read page. I honestly think that the book could be as much as a third shorter if it was better organized and refined.
December 7, 2025
De auteur heeft een interessant en groot onderzoek naar voren gebracht. Wat wisten de Duitsers nou echt over de onderdrukking en terreur van het naziregime?
Echter geef ik het boek toch 2 sterren.
Het onderzoek wordt erg droog gepresenteerd. Bakken informatie komen je kant op en dan ben je op zoek naar een duidelijke conclusie als onderdeel van de beantwoording van de hoofdvraag. Door de droge schrijfstijl kun je soms moeilijk de aandacht erbij houden.
Verder voelde het voor mij als geen compleet onderzoek. Ik waardeer het werk dat de auteur heeft verricht in dit onderzoek, maar ik denk niet dat er een concreet en vooral compleet antwoord is op de vraag: "Wat wisten de Duitsers nou echt van de onderdrukking en terreur van het naziregime?" Al durf ik niet te zeggen wat er precies mist.
Echter geef ik het boek toch 2 sterren.
Het onderzoek wordt erg droog gepresenteerd. Bakken informatie komen je kant op en dan ben je op zoek naar een duidelijke conclusie als onderdeel van de beantwoording van de hoofdvraag. Door de droge schrijfstijl kun je soms moeilijk de aandacht erbij houden.
Verder voelde het voor mij als geen compleet onderzoek. Ik waardeer het werk dat de auteur heeft verricht in dit onderzoek, maar ik denk niet dat er een concreet en vooral compleet antwoord is op de vraag: "Wat wisten de Duitsers nou echt van de onderdrukking en terreur van het naziregime?" Al durf ik niet te zeggen wat er precies mist.
January 17, 2021
An excellent social history of Nazi Germany that really underlines the silent consensus of the Volk that the country must be supported no matter what. Some complaints are that it was sometimes heavy on data which made reading kind of a slog, but it was in service of an argument I found interesting and compelling: that the Gestapo and Kripo were primarily reactive agencies of terror, rather than active terrorizers of the German home front. This book is also an important read in the context of modern systems of power, and how the begrudging consent of the people can be exploited in order to cause great harm without dissent or revolution. Longer review probably incoming.
April 3, 2021
This book merely confirms what many people have long suspected – that ordinary Germans were active supporters of the Nazi regime between 1933 and 1945.
It is salutary to note that most of the information passed to the Gestapo originated from German citizens, rather than the Gestapo adopting a proactive approach in rooting out dissidents and law breakers.
The author makes good use of what original documentation exists; much of it was destroyed at the end of the war.
However, there is an awful lot of repetition of material. Some judicious editing would have better conveyed the points the author was making.
It is salutary to note that most of the information passed to the Gestapo originated from German citizens, rather than the Gestapo adopting a proactive approach in rooting out dissidents and law breakers.
The author makes good use of what original documentation exists; much of it was destroyed at the end of the war.
However, there is an awful lot of repetition of material. Some judicious editing would have better conveyed the points the author was making.
June 17, 2017
I wanted to experience the psych of the german people leading up to and through ww2. This well referenced book was way beyond my expectations. Gallately's insight, conclusions and counter views left me pondering. One would expect an author of such a difficult and emotional subject to try and lead his readers. As books like this go, robert gallately was able to capture the era exquisitly without leafing an after taste of motives.
October 22, 2017
This book started off well but then it became bogged down by statistics.
June 10, 2019
Another excellent book from Robert Gellately about the Third Reich.
August 6, 2021
Very interesting book that resonates in the modern world
December 8, 2022
it was a required reading for my history class and it was a drag. good information and written plainly, easy to understand.
April 15, 2016
El centro de interés de este libro está principalmente en llegar a entender cómo un pueblo tan avanzado como el alemán de primer tercio de siglo XX pudo llegar a participar en la enormidad de crímenes cometidos contra seres humanos, incluso contra miembros de su propio pueblo. La conclusión al final del libro resume bien toda la información aportada de forma muy amena y clara. La propaganda arrojada sobre el pueblo alemán no puede ser excusa para aminorar esa culpa; la propaganda fue cuidadosamente elaborada para ajustarse al pensamiento y a los sentimientos que los alemanes tenían en ese momento de sus vidas. Los dictadores nazis no se impusieron a la fuerza sobre las mentes de sus conciudadanos, lo que hicieron fue decirles justamente lo que querían creer.
Cuánta verdad hay en ello. A la gente no le interesa la verdad si la verdad no apoya sus intereses. Prefieren la demagogia. Y esto sigue aplicándose en materia de política, de anatomía, o de matemáticas. Un libro altamente recomendado y para todos los públicos y tiempos.
Puedes aportar tu opinión como lector en https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...
Cuánta verdad hay en ello. A la gente no le interesa la verdad si la verdad no apoya sus intereses. Prefieren la demagogia. Y esto sigue aplicándose en materia de política, de anatomía, o de matemáticas. Un libro altamente recomendado y para todos los públicos y tiempos.
Puedes aportar tu opinión como lector en https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...
June 24, 2015
A well-documented analysis of the descent of German society into fear and madness, and, yes, in too many cases a zealotry of evil hard to contemplate. I do think, however, that Gellately underestimates the importance of terror in the failure of the vast majority to oppose the Nazis. Few Germans were heroes. But how many of us would be heroes under similar circumstances? Let's hope we won't have to find out.
October 24, 2017
Read as part of What's in a Name challenge - category- has ing in the title. This has been on my shelves for 12+ years.
Interesting reading. Promise folk a job, a radio, a car, crime free streets and work/education camps for 'undesirables' and look what can happen.
Interesting reading. Promise folk a job, a radio, a car, crime free streets and work/education camps for 'undesirables' and look what can happen.
September 16, 2008
A look at what the general German population did and did not know, and their actions, during WWII. Newspapers and other documents help to tell the story.
December 7, 2011
Frightening book in the sense that it shows the way that Germany was polarized in the years between the First and Second World Wars.
Read
April 3, 2018Llega un momento en que este libro se convierte en una historia de horror. Si el pueblo alemán pudo caer tan bajo, cualquiera puede caer igual de nuevo. La maldad está a un paso. Muy difícil de leer y por lo tanto de terminar. No por el estilo narrativo, sino por la extrapolación de lo que sucedió entonces.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 30 reviews