What do you think?
Rate this book
Inside Nazi Germany: Conformity, Opposition, and Racism in Everyday Life
In this remarkable social history of the Third Reich, Detlev J. K. Peukert surveys how ordinary citizens evaded or accepted Nazi policies of repression, terrorism, and racism. Peukert discusses not only the popular consensus that supported Nazism but also the opposition of the German middle class, working class, and youth.
“A highly original and informative synthesis of the most exciting new scholarship on Nazi Germany. It gives an intimate insight into people’s beliefs, aspirations, and fears, and it forces us to reassess how Hitler and Auschwitz were possible.”—Mary Nolan, New York Times Book Review
“An indispensable text for understanding the social history of Nazi rule.”—Rudy Koshar, American Historical Review
“To the historical reconsideration of National Socialism, Mr. Peukert’s book makes a signal contribution by demonstrating the way in which a movement that came to power loudly proclaiming its intention to restore old ways and traditions advanced the cause of modernity almost against its will.”—Gordon A. Craig, New York Review of Books
“Everyone interested in the social history of the Third Reich should read Peukert’s book.”—Choice
“A highly original and informative synthesis of the most exciting new scholarship on Nazi Germany. It gives an intimate insight into people’s beliefs, aspirations, and fears, and it forces us to reassess how Hitler and Auschwitz were possible.”—Mary Nolan, New York Times Book Review
“An indispensable text for understanding the social history of Nazi rule.”—Rudy Koshar, American Historical Review
“To the historical reconsideration of National Socialism, Mr. Peukert’s book makes a signal contribution by demonstrating the way in which a movement that came to power loudly proclaiming its intention to restore old ways and traditions advanced the cause of modernity almost against its will.”—Gordon A. Craig, New York Review of Books
“Everyone interested in the social history of the Third Reich should read Peukert’s book.”—Choice
288 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1982
7 people are currently reading
317 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews
July 4, 2013
A very dry read, for the most part. For me, its value lay in underscoring the incredible difficulty for ordinary Germans of living in a totalitarian state where terror is used to keep the populace in line. In such a society, acting morally becomes highly stressful. The normal routines of civil society are removed or banned by the state, and civil society becomes atomized. Social bonds are loosened. The tendency is to become apathetic. Peukert was one of the first historians to look at the Third Reich in terms of Alltagsgeschichte, or the history of everyday life.
October 14, 2024
An interesting analysis of the below the surface currents in Germany from 1933 to 1945. It attempts to place it somewhat in context of the prehistory, but primarily focuses on the differing social groups and how they interacted with the totalizing Nazi state.
Intro
In the NS State there was a surprising amount of grumbling, but the grumbling was usually direct at local officials. Hitler himself was immensely popular. “If Hitler only knew what his underlings were doing.” Most people thought Hitler worked hard for the best for Germany.
Middle Class
The middle class was the largest share of support for the Nazi regime. The small shopkeepers and small business felt oppressed by both big labor and big business. In the Nazi program they saw potential for redress. The middle class tending toward conservatism tended to desire and authoritarian government.
The craft workers also felt pressure from large industry and were looking to preserve their traditional lifestyle. Farmers were also often supportive of Nazi program. The blood and soil and the idealization of the farmer played well.
The other group making up the middle class, the white collar employees, had another reason for supporting the Nazi regime. They were more inclined to get on board with the technological solutions, the idea of making Germany efficient and technologically advanced, as exemplified in the Autobahn system but other technological or scientific solutions to problem.
Working class
The bulk of resistance, passive and otherwise, both before and after 1933, came from the working class. They had strong connections to the SPD and KPD (Socialist and Communist parties). After the Nazi‘s dissolved all labor unions in 1933, the mass of workers expected some type of popular uprising, but shockingly, none appeared. The swiftness and effectiveness of the elimination of Labor unions was remarkable. Over the next few years as employment outlooks and wages improved, the majority of worker hesitated to be the one to raise their head above the crowd. Though they may have been opposed to the regime, they now had too much to lose: a good job.
Resistance took a few forms. The first form of passive resistance was maintaining labor group connections, in itself somewhat dangerous. The next level of resistance was distributing leaflets or other forms of anti-government speech and writings. The final form of resistance was acts of work stoppages or work slowdowns. Arrest reports show that these types of resistance were common even during the war years.
Foreign workers also played an increasing roll as the war continued. Up to 30% of workers were foreign. This created another set of problems. A strict hierarchy was established between Germany and foreign workers and in the differing types of foreign workers. The most unpleasant jobs went to the lowest status and German workers took the better jobs. This served to placate many workers, but workers who were previous communist party members also felt a comradeship with the Soviet workers. As can be expected, foreign workers were the least compliant as arrest records prove. They made up the bulk of ‘resistance‘ arrests.
Young People
By the end of 1933 most youth groups were banned and half of the youth were in the Hitler Youth (HJ) or the German Girls Club (DBM). Only the Catholic groups survived (by concordat), but their activities were quickly limited to a very narrow range of religious activities.
The HJ was a competing power center to schools with no clear guidance on who had the final authority. HJ would skip school to fulfill their ‘duties’ or when they didn’t want to go to HJ events would claim school necessities.
In the war years, after nearly a decade of the official youth groups, some resistance began to appear. These were youths who grew up in the Nazi system, not knowing any other. Groups like the Edelweiss Pirates and associated group terrorized local HJ member when they had the opportunity and the advantage. They were a rag tag group of 14-18 year olds who just wanted to drop out of society. They would go on hikes, have campfires, and sing song that mocked the regime. Their activities ranged from delinquency to political resistance. Anti-government graffiti to distributing leaflets, depending of the group. These groups were largely drawn from working classes and were themselves primarily employed rather than in school as mandatory school ended at 14. Too young to be conscripted but old enough to work. They were a cause of consternation to local and national Nazis.
Another youth movement that developed was the swing clubs. These were more urban, mostly middle class youth who were in school. The would get together at clubs and listed to English jazz, ‘negro music’ as the Nazi’s called it. These groups were largely apolitical. They were only interested in music, dance and relaxation as opposed to the rigid discipline of the authorities. Both of these groups, the Edelweiss Pirates and the swing groups mixed boys and girls, something that never happened in officials groups.
These youth groups that were opposed to the conformist, authoritarian culture demonstrate the structural weakness of the totalitarian culture of the Nazis. The authoritarian and state controlled systems were unable to win over large segments of the youth.
Revolution
How much of the culture was revolutionary vs evolutionary is difficult to determine. The Nazi’s certainly built on many existing cultural tendencies. Some of these they only continued the trajectory, others that shifted and redirected. The public events all became propagandistic, so lost their attraction. As the regime progressed, the propaganda became more and more disconnected from daily reality and its power waned. The two cultural options were propagandistic or purely apolitical. This drove many non-state events and cultural output to become apolitical. Purely apolitical entertainment was allowed and even encouraged during the war years. This tended to rob cultural output from its relevance to speak to the lives of the people. The result was propaganda or kitsch.
The NS state always lived in the tension of traditional, rural blood-and-soil ideology yoked together with the scientific efficiency and industrialization required for economic and military advancement. The modern, industrial life of workers living in modern (‘degenerate’ Bauhaus style) apartment blocks was unavoidable. These two poles existed in tension: scientific rationalisms and medieval traditionalism.
Order
Order was a central concept of the NS philosophy, and one that was popular with the people. The harsh tactics used against political enemies, criminals, and the ‘work shy’, were widely supported. The laxity of the Weimar years was seen as an aberration of the German culture. The ideals of strict discipline were widely helped. This fierce animosity to laxity and flippant lifestyle is seen in Himmler’s strong reaction to swing groups. He pushed hard to get the ringleaders thrown into concentration camps for 2-3 years. This drove the movement underground, and it became more anti-government. The relaxation of sexual morals in these swing groups also was a source of grave concern.
Racialism
Underlying the entire edifice is Eugenics. The belief that if the future German national community is to be improved, it must begin with better stock today. All non-conformist must be ruthlessly eliminated from the gene pool. This means all the asocial, the work shy, the drunkards, prostitutes and so forth. The prime target of genetic purity was the elimination of Jewish influence. Jews were seen as the root of all sinister forces in Germany. Intellectual Jews: degenerate modernity, Orthodox Jews: backwards idiots, Wealthy Jews: greedy capitalists, Bolsheviks: New World order Jews, and so on. Virtually every problem is traceable to Jewish influence.
Gypsies were also targeted for their non-traditional lifestyle, their opposition to normal work and their reliance on theft as a group to be eliminated from the gene pool. Again, first through sterilization, then through deportation to the East and finally through annihilation.
And given the scientific aspirations of National Socialism, the problems with these people was traced, not to culture, but to biology. This social Darwinism strived for scientific legitimacy as is seen in government organizations such as the Institute for Criminal Biology. An institute tasked with rooting out the biological causes of criminality, i.e. elimination of criminal genes.
The enterprise was broadly supported by the scientific consensus that the community could be improved through the application of scientific methods to social questions. Institutions like the Institute for Racial Hygiene and Genetic Health Courts, but also in academic institutions set standard primarily of behavior to evaluate potential genetic contribution to the community. Eugenics had strong support in the scientific, peer-reviewed journals of the day, not only German. The was widespread consensus that social problems had a hereditary component. The only question was to how large and which current measures were most effective in forming a better community of tomorrow.
The book includes an almost 10 page quote from a social psychology paper to give a concrete form to the contemporary science. Psychology, sociology and anthropology in large supported these findings. To implement this scientifically planned program required a total state, which the Nazi provided. “The application of meticulous scientific research closely backed up with state power would make possible” a better community.
Atomization
The oppressive nature of all public interactions with government officials as well as with private organization created a self censorship of public communications. As ¼ of cases the Gestapo prosecuted for anti-government sentiments traced to informers, one could never be safe in conversations. Only in small rural communities or very tight knit religious communities could on talk with any intimacy. Driving intimacy out of almost every conversation isolated and atomized the population. Social action became almost impossible.
Every effort was made to eliminate a private life. This is one of the key factors explaining the lack of open resistance even when, toward the end of the war, the majority had turned even against Hitler. The Nazi’s succeeded in not only destroying the material state, but also the Volksgemeinschaft (national community) they purported to support and perfect.
The book concludes with 13 theses or generalizations we can draw from looking at the development of society during the NS period. On the whole, offers some important insight and lessons to maintaining freedom in our modern societies.
Intro
In the NS State there was a surprising amount of grumbling, but the grumbling was usually direct at local officials. Hitler himself was immensely popular. “If Hitler only knew what his underlings were doing.” Most people thought Hitler worked hard for the best for Germany.
Middle Class
The middle class was the largest share of support for the Nazi regime. The small shopkeepers and small business felt oppressed by both big labor and big business. In the Nazi program they saw potential for redress. The middle class tending toward conservatism tended to desire and authoritarian government.
The craft workers also felt pressure from large industry and were looking to preserve their traditional lifestyle. Farmers were also often supportive of Nazi program. The blood and soil and the idealization of the farmer played well.
The other group making up the middle class, the white collar employees, had another reason for supporting the Nazi regime. They were more inclined to get on board with the technological solutions, the idea of making Germany efficient and technologically advanced, as exemplified in the Autobahn system but other technological or scientific solutions to problem.
Working class
The bulk of resistance, passive and otherwise, both before and after 1933, came from the working class. They had strong connections to the SPD and KPD (Socialist and Communist parties). After the Nazi‘s dissolved all labor unions in 1933, the mass of workers expected some type of popular uprising, but shockingly, none appeared. The swiftness and effectiveness of the elimination of Labor unions was remarkable. Over the next few years as employment outlooks and wages improved, the majority of worker hesitated to be the one to raise their head above the crowd. Though they may have been opposed to the regime, they now had too much to lose: a good job.
Resistance took a few forms. The first form of passive resistance was maintaining labor group connections, in itself somewhat dangerous. The next level of resistance was distributing leaflets or other forms of anti-government speech and writings. The final form of resistance was acts of work stoppages or work slowdowns. Arrest reports show that these types of resistance were common even during the war years.
Foreign workers also played an increasing roll as the war continued. Up to 30% of workers were foreign. This created another set of problems. A strict hierarchy was established between Germany and foreign workers and in the differing types of foreign workers. The most unpleasant jobs went to the lowest status and German workers took the better jobs. This served to placate many workers, but workers who were previous communist party members also felt a comradeship with the Soviet workers. As can be expected, foreign workers were the least compliant as arrest records prove. They made up the bulk of ‘resistance‘ arrests.
Young People
By the end of 1933 most youth groups were banned and half of the youth were in the Hitler Youth (HJ) or the German Girls Club (DBM). Only the Catholic groups survived (by concordat), but their activities were quickly limited to a very narrow range of religious activities.
The HJ was a competing power center to schools with no clear guidance on who had the final authority. HJ would skip school to fulfill their ‘duties’ or when they didn’t want to go to HJ events would claim school necessities.
In the war years, after nearly a decade of the official youth groups, some resistance began to appear. These were youths who grew up in the Nazi system, not knowing any other. Groups like the Edelweiss Pirates and associated group terrorized local HJ member when they had the opportunity and the advantage. They were a rag tag group of 14-18 year olds who just wanted to drop out of society. They would go on hikes, have campfires, and sing song that mocked the regime. Their activities ranged from delinquency to political resistance. Anti-government graffiti to distributing leaflets, depending of the group. These groups were largely drawn from working classes and were themselves primarily employed rather than in school as mandatory school ended at 14. Too young to be conscripted but old enough to work. They were a cause of consternation to local and national Nazis.
Another youth movement that developed was the swing clubs. These were more urban, mostly middle class youth who were in school. The would get together at clubs and listed to English jazz, ‘negro music’ as the Nazi’s called it. These groups were largely apolitical. They were only interested in music, dance and relaxation as opposed to the rigid discipline of the authorities. Both of these groups, the Edelweiss Pirates and the swing groups mixed boys and girls, something that never happened in officials groups.
These youth groups that were opposed to the conformist, authoritarian culture demonstrate the structural weakness of the totalitarian culture of the Nazis. The authoritarian and state controlled systems were unable to win over large segments of the youth.
Revolution
How much of the culture was revolutionary vs evolutionary is difficult to determine. The Nazi’s certainly built on many existing cultural tendencies. Some of these they only continued the trajectory, others that shifted and redirected. The public events all became propagandistic, so lost their attraction. As the regime progressed, the propaganda became more and more disconnected from daily reality and its power waned. The two cultural options were propagandistic or purely apolitical. This drove many non-state events and cultural output to become apolitical. Purely apolitical entertainment was allowed and even encouraged during the war years. This tended to rob cultural output from its relevance to speak to the lives of the people. The result was propaganda or kitsch.
The NS state always lived in the tension of traditional, rural blood-and-soil ideology yoked together with the scientific efficiency and industrialization required for economic and military advancement. The modern, industrial life of workers living in modern (‘degenerate’ Bauhaus style) apartment blocks was unavoidable. These two poles existed in tension: scientific rationalisms and medieval traditionalism.
Order
Order was a central concept of the NS philosophy, and one that was popular with the people. The harsh tactics used against political enemies, criminals, and the ‘work shy’, were widely supported. The laxity of the Weimar years was seen as an aberration of the German culture. The ideals of strict discipline were widely helped. This fierce animosity to laxity and flippant lifestyle is seen in Himmler’s strong reaction to swing groups. He pushed hard to get the ringleaders thrown into concentration camps for 2-3 years. This drove the movement underground, and it became more anti-government. The relaxation of sexual morals in these swing groups also was a source of grave concern.
Racialism
Underlying the entire edifice is Eugenics. The belief that if the future German national community is to be improved, it must begin with better stock today. All non-conformist must be ruthlessly eliminated from the gene pool. This means all the asocial, the work shy, the drunkards, prostitutes and so forth. The prime target of genetic purity was the elimination of Jewish influence. Jews were seen as the root of all sinister forces in Germany. Intellectual Jews: degenerate modernity, Orthodox Jews: backwards idiots, Wealthy Jews: greedy capitalists, Bolsheviks: New World order Jews, and so on. Virtually every problem is traceable to Jewish influence.
Gypsies were also targeted for their non-traditional lifestyle, their opposition to normal work and their reliance on theft as a group to be eliminated from the gene pool. Again, first through sterilization, then through deportation to the East and finally through annihilation.
And given the scientific aspirations of National Socialism, the problems with these people was traced, not to culture, but to biology. This social Darwinism strived for scientific legitimacy as is seen in government organizations such as the Institute for Criminal Biology. An institute tasked with rooting out the biological causes of criminality, i.e. elimination of criminal genes.
The enterprise was broadly supported by the scientific consensus that the community could be improved through the application of scientific methods to social questions. Institutions like the Institute for Racial Hygiene and Genetic Health Courts, but also in academic institutions set standard primarily of behavior to evaluate potential genetic contribution to the community. Eugenics had strong support in the scientific, peer-reviewed journals of the day, not only German. The was widespread consensus that social problems had a hereditary component. The only question was to how large and which current measures were most effective in forming a better community of tomorrow.
The book includes an almost 10 page quote from a social psychology paper to give a concrete form to the contemporary science. Psychology, sociology and anthropology in large supported these findings. To implement this scientifically planned program required a total state, which the Nazi provided. “The application of meticulous scientific research closely backed up with state power would make possible” a better community.
Atomization
The oppressive nature of all public interactions with government officials as well as with private organization created a self censorship of public communications. As ¼ of cases the Gestapo prosecuted for anti-government sentiments traced to informers, one could never be safe in conversations. Only in small rural communities or very tight knit religious communities could on talk with any intimacy. Driving intimacy out of almost every conversation isolated and atomized the population. Social action became almost impossible.
Every effort was made to eliminate a private life. This is one of the key factors explaining the lack of open resistance even when, toward the end of the war, the majority had turned even against Hitler. The Nazi’s succeeded in not only destroying the material state, but also the Volksgemeinschaft (national community) they purported to support and perfect.
The book concludes with 13 theses or generalizations we can draw from looking at the development of society during the NS period. On the whole, offers some important insight and lessons to maintaining freedom in our modern societies.
July 17, 2007
Really good.
Peukert focuses on the atomization of society within Nazi Germany, and how consent and coercion functioned under Nazi rule. He touches on workers' organized resistance in the early years of the regime and also calls attention to subtler forms of resisitance. A strength of this book is Peukert's analysis of how fascist rule altered the distinction between political acts and everyday behavior. He is particularly good when he discusses "deviant" leisure activities and the resilience of working-class culture in the face of fascist repression. Peukert also devotes considerable space to discussing active and passive collaboration with the Nazi regime.
However, this is not a good introductory book; it's extremely dense and flies from subject to subject. I'd suggest reading it in tandem with a broader overview of Nazi Germany.
Peukert focuses on the atomization of society within Nazi Germany, and how consent and coercion functioned under Nazi rule. He touches on workers' organized resistance in the early years of the regime and also calls attention to subtler forms of resisitance. A strength of this book is Peukert's analysis of how fascist rule altered the distinction between political acts and everyday behavior. He is particularly good when he discusses "deviant" leisure activities and the resilience of working-class culture in the face of fascist repression. Peukert also devotes considerable space to discussing active and passive collaboration with the Nazi regime.
However, this is not a good introductory book; it's extremely dense and flies from subject to subject. I'd suggest reading it in tandem with a broader overview of Nazi Germany.
July 10, 2020
This is a phenomenal and immensely important account of the complexity of everyday life in Nazi Germany. It lays bear the many dilemmas, constraints, and controls which dominated the lives of Germans in the 1930s and early 1940s. These are illustrated with a large number of extremely revealing primary sources.
June 29, 2025
This book is worth it for the first chapter alone which summarizes the draw of the Nazi party platform in non-Marxist terms, outside of the traditional analysis of Fascism as an industrial/capitalist inevitability.
Politics 101 is taking advantage of a moment where people feel disaffected, disconnected, and without purpose by giving them what they are missing.
Politics 101 is taking advantage of a moment where people feel disaffected, disconnected, and without purpose by giving them what they are missing.
July 12, 2022
Still reading - but lost on bus. This is a valuable academic approach to the issues of Anti-Semitism and has helped theorize the issues behind 100 Battalion book (I will add soon)
July 17, 2016
a bit hard work due to it being a densely written account aimed mainly at serious scholars of the subject, nevertheless it is a rewarding read when you get into it. It is an analysis mainly of those resident in Nazi Germany in the 1930s & 40s who in some degree or other were opposed to the regime in charge & how that opposition was expressed. In many cases this was sublimated by the subject removing themselves as much as possible from the world outside, but in some cases it came out in acts of rebellion or outright resistance. Particularly interesting is the piece of the anti regime youth movements, such as the Edelweiss Pirates whose activities on many levels mirrored those of the "feral youths" of today.
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews