other nationalists'- resistance againstHitler . Thyssen shook his head. Schachtset out to fool everybody by soundingmore Hitlerian than Hitler ." Morethan ever before," he recalls proudly," I used Nazi phrases in my speechesin 1938.... The uninformed massescheered when the merger with Austria ,asked for by the Austrians again andagain for two decades, became reality.The unpleasant form with which thismerger was carried out went unnoticedin the rejoicing." The opposition thatthe Schachts were hiding behind thebrave Nazi phrase was opposition toHitler 's" form" and manner, never tohis principles. When the conspiratorstook up arms in 1944, many of the re-spectable right- wingers merely graspedat this last opportunity to desert theship now that it was about to sink, justas they had at first helped hoist thesails for conquest.
In 1941, Schacht, according to hisown report, advised Hitler to use alldiplomatic means to end the war. Hetold the Führer that the time had cometo stop" on the peak of his militarysuccess." By his own admission, Schachtknew that Germany was" not suffi-ciently prepared economically for along war." One year earlier, in 1940,the financial wizard had even offeredto go to the United States in order to
" slow down America 's aid program toBritish armament." There is every indi-cation that the plans of the refined na-tionalists were simply more subtle, andtherefore, perhaps, even more danger-ous than those of the lowly corporal.Today this nationalist group has notonly begun to rally; it has more funds,cleaner shirts, and, of course, moregraceful table manners than Hitler 'svictims. Moreover, its members haveusurped the halo of anti- Nazi conspir-acy, and wear it jauntily.
Schacht maintains that as long as hewas in office the economic rights of theJews were protected. Aside from thefalsehood of this statement, it is signif-icant that Schacht favored giving theJews of Germany the same" rights" aswould be granted to foreigners- ahighly doubtful privilege in Nazi Ger many . He expresses horror over themurder of millions of Jews , but he de-clares:" My attitude toward the Jewish problem has always remained the same.I have always regarded it as contraryto the best interests of the Jews them-
selves that cultural key positions werecoveted by them.... Cultural policycoveted by them.... Cultural policyin a Christian state must not be ex-posed to non- Christians ...." WhenHitler proclaimed a gigantic collectivefine against all Jews , and it was foundthat the money could be paid only ifadditional banknotes were printed,with Jewish property as their support,Schacht recalls:" An ice- cold sensationwent down my spine." Was this a reac-tion to the monstrosity of the injustice?No, simply the financier's terror:" Wehad arrived at the printing of worthlessmoney."
With monotonous similarity the non-Nazi nationalists, from the pathetic oldThyssen to the vigorous new leadersof the Ruhr , keep repeating that theyare not politicians, know nothing aboutpolitics, and regard themselves as" justplain businessmen." Then they discussnational and international economicpolicies that make Hitler 's geopoliticssound like a beginners' course. Schachthimself, formerly an advocate of Ger man colonial expansion, a few weeksago told an interviewer from the NewYork Herald Tribune that Germany should become the instrument of Presi dent Truman 's plan to develop back-ward areas. Link that with Schacht'sexpressed admiration for" the sensiblepolicy of Bismarck."
All the nationalists after loud con-demnation of the Nazi interlude- calldemnation of the Nazi interlude- callfor a return to the day just beforeyesterday. They do so, not because theyloved the struggling Weimar Republic ,but rather because the democracy ofthat period was too harmless to disturbthe pattern of their own power anddreams. If only the clock could beturned back, they feel, they would havethe sense not to fall for a" half- edu-cated" upstart again. This time thelegitimate children of the ruling castewould fend off interlopers.
Any move, therefore, to break up thestatus quo is violently attacked. Men-tion re- education, and Schacht an-swers:" One ought to keep in mindthat the German people from Charle magne ( Karl the Great ) to the French Revolution had been culturally thedominating and leading nation of Eu rope ." Mention reorientation, andSchacht answers:" The ideas of race,leadership principle and militarismhave not been taken seriously by asmany as five per cent of the population.
The people themselves have shownnothing but sympathy for the Jews ,persecuted by the party.... The Nürn berg trial has not offered any proof thatthe mass of the German people hadanything whatsoever to do with theNazi ideology which has been formu-lated( sic) by the prosecution."
There is a dangerous temptation for
American observers to swallow theGerman rightists' defense of the pre-Hitler status quo. The temptationarises out of the false equation of theAmerican conservative with the Ger man nationalist. The fallacy is in thefact that the American wants to pre-serve a status quo that is already demo-cratic; the German wants to re- estab-lish the springboard from which anydemocratic opposition to the authori-tarian, caste- ordered state can be de-stroyed. There is a great temptation tosay, amiably, that politics is politics-whether the scene is Germany or Amer ica . Schacht exposes this fallacy simply:" Only people with full stomachs aredemocrats." But lest we be tricked intoaccepting these deceptive apologies, itshould be recalled that, under theGreater German Way of Life, manywestern European democrats managedto hold onto their ideals on very insuf-ficient diets.
Although Schacht refuses to takeeven an infinitesimal part of the re-sponsibility for Germany 's wrongs, heconstantly manages to stress his ownprominence. In this he is symbolic ofall German nationalists: They rejectthe idea of Germany 's guilt; but at thesame time they see Germany and Ger man problems as paramount.
In Schacht and the nationalists thereis a surface veneer of piety and Kultur .Twin trademarks of these men's outlook-both are just as hollow and dishonestas the disavowal of" politics" by peoplewho have freely offered their economicpower and genius to a political oppres-sor and a military aggressor. Their" re-sistance" developed only when Hitler-presumably their willing tool- showedhe had a mind of his own and madethem, too, his slaves. His sin, however,became unforgivable only when hestaggered into defeat. Failure was thesupreme crime. Bad manners and" half-education" were the real horrors. Thecorporal- almost alone- is guilty. Helost. He lacked Kultur .
The Reporter, October 11, 1949
14