LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
[Correspondents are requested to keep their letters as brief as is reasonably possible. Signed letters are given a preference over those bearing a pseudonym, and the latter must be accompanied by the name and address of the author, which will be treated as confidential.—Ed. THE SPECTATOR]
THE OPPOSITION IN GERMANY
[To the Editor of THE SPECTATOR] SIR,—" Realistic policy " is a favourite slogan in these days. This - realism " tries to ignore ideological differences and sacrifices principles "for the sake of peace." There is a passionate dis- cussion going on, whether this policy will ultimately succeed or is doomed to failure. The voice of the German people is not heard in this discussion. Even superficial observers will be convinced by now that the Nazi clique and the regimented Press are not entitled to speak in the name of the German flatly. It might be interesting, therefore, to hear the opinions of an average German with moderate views who enjoys the freedom of this country and is no Jew, but has an enviable pedigree from the Nazi point of view.
If you ask me : " Is it possible to live in peace with Germany? " my answer depends on what you mean by " Germany." If you mean the present regime, my answer is definitely "No." If you mean the German people, my answer is most emphatically " Yes."
It is, of course, possible that totalitarian and democratic countries live peacefully together, and collaborate to a certain extent. Pre-war Russia and France have shown that even an alliance is possible between countries with entirely different forms of government. Why, then, should it be impossible for the democracies to collaborate peacefully with Nazi-Germany?
Such a collaboration would be possible under one condition : all the Governments concerned must recognise a common code of international law, and keep their word. International law, however, is despised by the Nazis, and their pledges have been broken frequently. There is not only a clash between different forms of government, but also a clash between different conceptions of foreign policy. The difference is even deeper than that, it goes to the very roots of human existence. There is an abyss which cannot be bridged.
Many Germans who had no Fascist mentality were " realistic " enough to collaborate with the Nazis, and even join their party. It is important to understand their argu- ments in order to understand why Hitler got so much support from the most unexpected quarters. One of them, Dr. Hermann Rauschning, ex-President of Danzig, once a pro- minent Nazi, but now an ardent supporter of the German Freedom party, tells his story in the monthly Das wahre Deutschland. His article ought to be read by everybody who wishes to know where the wind is blowing in Germany.
What we see now is not just a revival of the old Pan-German dreams of world domination, not only the old power politics in a new disguise, but all this combined with a recklessness unrivalled in history. How futile to think that these dreamers could be satisfied by handing over some territory to them, or could be bought off by economic concessions, or could be reformed by talking nicely to them. What they call " Dynamism " is incompatible with reason. Yielding to them means giving up everything, not just a few colonies. The only way to deal with them is to oppose them, the only language they understand is that of brutal force.
As long as the Nazis govern Germany, the threat of war will hang over the world, unless the democracies are prepared to surrender unconditionally. They may " only " aim at the Ukraine tomorrow, but the turn of the British Empire will come eventually. People who think I am a scaremonger, and exaggerating, need only read the public speeches of prominent Nazis, and get some information about the activities of Nazi agents all over the world. They have taken over the former role of the Third International, causing trouble wherever an opportunity arises. Not only Streicher is dreaming of a Fascist world revolution.
I see only one alternative to war—the change of the system in Germany. What are the prospects for such a change? Hitler pretends that the nation is solidly behind him. The result of elections and huge demonstrations seem to prove that. Well, I, too, voted for Hitler, but it was not a demonstra- tion for him, but a demonstration of my cowardliness (" realism ") or of my tact, because I did not want to hurt the feelings of the man who watched me. I also showed enthusiasm at public meetings when I was asked to. People who blame me for that do not know yet what terror can do.
Nevertheless, there have been many signs of oppositional feeling. More heroism has been shown than is known to the world. The opposition learnt soon that their methods caused too many victims, and changed them entirely. Instead of the dashing and courageous tactics which had no visible effect, they adopted others which, of course, cannot be disclosed.
In the beginning, only the Left-wing opposition was organised on a nation-wide scale, but there existed many groups which had at least casual contacts. Things changed when the German Freedom Party was formed, grouping Conservatives. Liberals, Socialists, and even former Nazis. This party belies Hitler's statement that Bolshevism is the only alternative to Nazism in Germany. Its different components all agree on a few essentials; they stand for Democracy, Freedom and Peace. As a German who is in touch with these forces in Germany. and knows how many key positions are already occupied, I have no doubt about the final victory of this movement. I only hope that it succeeds before war breaks out to make it quite clear that the change is not brought about by outside pres- sure. If they do not succeed in time, the most terrible slaughter the world has ever seen seems to me inevitable. This will certainly bring the complete destruction of Nazism and every brand of Fascism, but it will also endanger the very existence of my country which I love with all my heart.—
Previous page
