Latest news with #ThirdReich
Yahoo
08-06-2025
- Entertainment
- Yahoo
How to crush a nation's soul: The Nazi crusade against "degenerate" art
In July 1937, artist Marc Chagall discovered that his paintings were enjoying a star turn in a singularly unexpected venue — an exhibition organized by the Nazi Party in Munich, the birthplace of its political fortunes. Chagall's work often addressed explicitly Jewish themes: In one such painting, a bearded rabbi takes a pinch of snuff in ochre-yellow surroundings, his wry eyes looking in the direction of the viewer but not necessarily at them. How one is meant to interpret this painting, or the artist's intent, is not clear. Adolf Ziegler, the Nazi functionary charged with overseeing the exhibition, perceived no ambiguity. He provided the supposed answer for "The Rabbi" and every other artwork displayed alongside it. "Look around you at these monstrosities of insanity, insolence, incompetence and degeneration," he declared in his opening address. "I would need several freight trains to clear our galleries of this rubbish ... This will happen soon." But through the end of November that year, at least, this "rubbish," served as a useful prop for the Third Reich's campaign to excise society of its corrupting elements and usher in a new era in which art represented the superior virtues of the German nation, as the Nazis saw it. The 'Degenerate Art Exhibition,' as it was unsubtly named, drew an audience that eventually exceeded two million visitors. It featured 650 works confiscated from German museums and judged by a panel to represent "decadence," "weakness of character," "mental disease," "racial impurity" and other hallmarks of Weimar-era modernity. The exhibition included an entire room dedicated to the "Revelation of the Jewish Racial Soul" and featured paintings by and about the ethnic and religious group whom the Nazis largely blamed for Germany's supposed moral and material decline. That room and others also included works whose subject matter offended reactionary Nazi sensibilities for other reasons, such as Otto Dix's "The Trench": a gruesome tangle of human remains, discarded weapons, leaking brain matter and faces, suspended in agony in the aftermath of an artillery bombardment, with a soldier's body propped up by a tripod of fixed bayonets high above the carnage. In another of Dix's works, the drypoint "War Cripples," disfigured veterans return home, many of them with limbs missing — a common sight across Germany after World War I. (Dix was himself a combat veteran.) Such depictions of war, the curators wrote in the exhibition catalogue, were tantamount to "military sabotage." "Here, the 'art' enters the service of Marxist propaganda for conscientious objection," the catalog essay continued, referring to the practice of resisting conscription on moral grounds, even under threat of punishment by the state. Dix's art was deemed an 'insult to the German heroes of the Great War.' Elsewhere in the exhibition, one could visit the "Insanity Room,' which displayed abstract paintings. The Nazis were not fans. 'In the paintings and drawings of this chamber of horrors, there is no telling what was in the sick brains of those who wielded the brush or the pencil,' the catalog explained. Once the point had been made, some of these artworks were burned. Others, however, fell into the hands of collectors, including a number of high-ranking party officials. The Nazi penchant for playing the role of art critics and connoisseurs, combined with the party's aim of attaining complete control over all aspects of German life, resulted in a far more heavy-handed effort to twist the form and spirit of art to political ends than the scattered bleating characteristic of today's culture wars. In this campaign, the Nazis styled themselves as saviors, rather than mere destroyers, of culture. 'You artists live in great and happy times. Above you the most powerful and understanding patron the Führer loves artists, because he is himself one. Under his blessed hand a Renaissance has begun," proclaimed propaganda minister Joseph Goebbels. Art, as the Nazis understood it, was to be the reference point by which the German master race recognized its own superiority, and must be used to serve its ends. 'True art is and remains eternal,' Hitler once said. "It does not follow the law of fashion. Its effect is that of a revelation arising from the depths of the essential character of a people.' Indeed, Nazi artists spared no effort in ferreting as much inspiration as they could from the pre-modern and mythic German past — the wars of the Nibelungen, the medieval Reich, the Teutonic crusades in the Baltic, the Protestant Reformation — and making extrapolations about the timelessness of German virtue. The Nazis even infringed on cultural prerogatives claimed by Benito Mussolini's fascist Italy, citing Germanophile philosopher Houston Steward Chamberlain's claim that the German people, by right of Aryan blood passed down from the Greeks and Romans, were destined to revive the 'lost ideal' of classical beauty. Revival was indeed the operative word. The Nazis held that German society had become diseased by the advent of modern art — meaning not just works that questioned or contradicted Nazi policy, but any kind of art bearing the hallmarks of modernity: visually distorted Expressionist paintings, atonal music unfettered by a central key, edifices of the Dada movement that defied aesthetic logic. As such, it was their mission to expunge such art from the public memory. Even before seizing national power in 1933, the Nazis implemented test cases on the state level. In 1930, the Nazi Party chief in Thuringia and state Minister of Education and the Interior, Wilhelm Frick, issued orders to remove 70 Expressionist paintings from the Schloss Weimar museum, fire the director of another museum for displaying modern art in its exhibitions, and ban all pacifist or antiwar books and films, including Erich Maria Remarque's legendary World War I novel 'All Quiet on the Western Front.' The sources of modern art, according to social critic Max Nordau, were decadent, corrupted societies whose artists, afflicted with 'degeneration' as a form of mental illness, could only produce work reflecting their degenerate selves. But what the Nazis seized upon most fervently – although they certainly didn't admit to inspiration from Nordau, who was both Jewish and a Zionist — was his claim that an individual's mental deformity lay in the presence of physical deformities like 'multiple and stunted growths in the first line of asymmetry, the unequal development of the two halves of the face and cranium… etc.,' and his prescribed solution: 'Characterization of the leading degenerates as mentally diseased: unmasking and stigmatizing of their imitators as enemies to society; cautioning the public against the lies of these parasites.' Here was the framework by which the Nazis attacked modernists not just as purveyors of low-quality creations, but also as perverted, dangerous and, whenever applicable, racially inferior. Artistic works that eschewed the so-called Nordic ideal of beauty, in subject or in style, were likewise condemned for undermining German high culture. Nazi architect Paul Schultze-Naumburg later pushed Nordau's theory of degeneration further down the slippery slope, arguing that it was not social conditioning that produced such despicable degenerates, but race, and in particular race-mixing. Only racially pure artists could produce art that embodied classical ideals, he argued, while their racially-mixed colleagues could create only disorder and monstrosity. Nazi leaders like racial theorist Alfred Rosenberg embraced Schultze-Naumburg's theory as a magnificent insight. Nordau, who had declared that composer Richard Wagner — perhaps the Nazis' most venerated cultural icon — possessed a 'greater abundance of degeneration than all the degenerates put together with whom we have hitherto become acquainted,' would no doubt have disagreed. While Nordau's distaste for Wagner – whose operas were embraced by Hitler with quasi-religious fervor – was not 'racial' in nature and may have been inflated by the composer's notorious antisemitism, questions over what qualified as degenerate art illustrated how nebulous the concept was. Goebbels and Rosenberg squabbled over whether some forms of modern art should have a place in the new Germany, with the former taking great pains to keep Expressionist artists such as avowed Nazi Emil Nolde in the political fold and dispel criticism that Nazi cultural policy was overly reactionary. "We National Socialists are not unmodern; we are the carrier of a new modernity, not only in politics and in social matters, but also in art and intellectual matters,' Goebbels argued. 'To be modern means to stand near the spirit of the present Zeitgeist. And for art, too, no other modernity is possible.' In the first year of Nazi rule in Germany, the Expressionists continued to enjoy Goebbels' patronage. And in the battle for practical control of the party's cultural policy, Goebbels, a far more consummate politician and organizer than the pedantic Rosenberg, appeared to seize the upper hand; in September 1933, Goebbels founded the Reich Chamber of Culture, which all working German artists were required to join, Aryan certificate in hand. (Its members, of course, were all artists whom Goebbels considered to be loyal Nazis and sufficiently 'Nordic' in ethnicity and character.) But the next year, Hitler himself declared that all forms of modern art were degenerate and had no place in his Germany, which would not 'be befuddled or intimidated' by modernist 'charlatans.' Rosenberg received an even harsher rebuke from Hitler, who preferred Greek and Roman classicism to Rosenberg's neo-Gothic aesthetic and denounced 'those backwards-lookers who imagine that they can impose upon the National Socialist revolution, as a binding heritage for the future, a 'Teutonic art' sprung from the fuzzy world of their own romantic conceptions.'With the party's cultural doctrine now clear, artists who previously enjoyed Nazi patronage suddenly found themselves stripped of official sanction and saw their art torn from museum walls. Ernst Ludwig Kirschner, an Expressionist painter who privately disdained the Nazi regime, sought to assure Nazi authorities that he was 'neither a Jew nor a Social Democrat,' but was expelled from the Prussian Academy of Arts anyway. The aforementioned Emil Nolde, who had condemned the paintings of 'half-breeds, bastards, and mulattoes' in his 1934 autobiography, could not stop government officials from removing 1,052 of his works from museums, the most of any artist in Germany. Some of his paintings, in fact, wound up in the 1937 Degenerate Art Exhibition, alongside Dix's antiwar compositions and Chagall's rabbi. The mass removals were codified in 1938 by the sweeping Degenerate Law Act, which declared that 'products of degenerate art that have been secured in museums or in collections open to the public before this law went into effect… can be appropriated by the Reich without compensation.' Nazi officials, on the other hand, were happy to be compensated for unloading undesirable works of art to foreign collectors. Those that couldn't be sold abroad or hidden within officials' palatial homes were consigned to the bonfires. In 1939 alone, 4,000 paintings met such a fate. Artists who complained too much about any of this, or who were suspected of defiance, soon faced worse fates. Shortly after his disgrace, Expressionist painter Max Pechstein received teaching offers from schools in Mexico and Turkey, but Nazi authorities refused to grant him an exit visa and left him to languish in rural Pomerania until the end of the war. In 1939, Dix was thrown in jail over an improbable accusation that he was involved in an assassination attempt against Hitler. Max Beckmann fled to the Netherlands in 1937, only to watch German tanks enter Amsterdam in 1940. In a desperate bid to preserve 'degenerate' art he had produced in exile, Beckmann hid his 'Departure' in the attic and wrote on the back of the canvas: 'Scenes from Shakespeare's 'Tempest.'" He came under police surveillance, but was not arrested. More conformist artists, on the other hand, enjoyed much more flattering official reviews. Just blocks away from the infamous Degenerate Art Exhibition, Nazi officials staged a competing show, the 'Great German Art Exhibition,' whose centerpiece was an enormous canvas featuring Hitler on horseback and in immaculate plate armor, gazing toward the future and carrying a Nazi flag. For all of Hitler's obsession with aesthetics, art had become politics by other means. Degeneracy had not been replaced by morality, wrote artist Oskar Schlemmer, but by 'tried and true purveyors of kitsch.'
Yahoo
06-06-2025
- General
- Yahoo
D-Day's Legacy: Aging Heroes Urge Freedom's Remembrance
On June 6, 1944, nearly 160,000 Allied soldiers stormed the beaches of Normandy in an assault that would be the beginning of the end for Nazi-occupied Western Europe. Operation Overlord, as the invasion was called, stands not only as a military triumph but also as a testament to courage, sacrifice, and the responsibility of remembrance—remembering those who lost their lives for our freedom. The human cost of that day and the weeks that followed was staggering. More than 4,400 Allied soldiers died on D-Day alone. Germany suffered approximately 320,000 total battle casualties during the campaign, with 30,000 killed, 80,000 wounded, and around 210,000 reported missing: over 70% of the missing were later confirmed as prisoners of war, according to German Military records. In contrast, the United States recorded around 135,000 casualties, with 29,000 killed and the rest either wounded or missing. The UK suffered around 65,000 battle casualties, with 11,000 killed and 54,000 wounded or missing. However, these sacrifices laid the groundwork for breaking the Nazi grip on Europe and expediting the collapse of the Third Reich. Today, on the beaches of Normandy, veterans and their families gathered to honor those who never came home. Parachute jumps, flyovers, and solemn parades paid tribute to a generation that reshaped the world. Among those honored was 101-year-old Harold Terens, a radio repairman who served with the Allied forces alongside centenarians Arlester Brown and Wally King, per AP News. As the years pass, the number of D-Day veterans able to attend these commemorations continues to dwindle. Only 23 veterans were present at this year's ceremony, down from 50 last year. With every passing year, the responsibility to carry forward their stories grows more and more important. Figures like 104-year-old nurse Betty Huffman-Rosevear and 'Papa Jake' Larson have turned to social media to share their experiences with younger generations of Americans, ensuring that the memory of D-Day lives on beyond the pages of history books and transitions to the screen-addicted era. Larson's YouTube channel, Story Time With Papa Jake, recently hit 16 thousand subscribers as of publication. D-Day was not just a gritty American victory; it was a shared triumph achieved by a collection of countries: Britain, Canada, Poland, Norway, and countless others, whose soldiers fought side by side to liberate Europe. With each passing year, that call to keep the memory of D-Day grows more pressing. Now, more than ever, we must honor D-Day not as a distant story but as a reminder of our responsibility to stand up for freedom – and never forget the price paid for it.
LeMonde
01-06-2025
- Politics
- LeMonde
The German army and its ghosts
When he attended the commemorations of the Allied landing in Normandy on June 6, 2024, Brigadier General Andreas Steinhaus felt "something special, as a German soldier, to be invited to that place." He has always considered himself part of the Allies. Born in 1968 in West Germany, he celebrated D-Day as a child with the feeling of being "on the right side." Then he joined the army at 19 to "defend freedom," before fighting in Afghanistan, Bosnia, Iraq and Sudan alongside other Europeans and Americans. On June 5, 2024, however, he took the time to visit the grave of his great-uncle, who had served in the Wehrmacht, the Nazi Germany forces. He is buried a few kilometers from the coast in the German cemetery at La Cambe, alongside 21,000 soldiers of the Third Reich killed during the Battle of Normandy. "One day, I was at his grave, the next, I was with the American soldiers," he recounted from his office in Saarlouis, a town in Saarland, where his parachute brigade is stationed. "The notion of homeland is not geographical," he said, highlighting the complexity of the history he inherited. Stories like his are common in the Bundeswehr, the name of the army in Germany. There are those whose relatives served in the Wehrmacht – "the other army," as one of them called it. Others had parents in the East German army before being integrated overnight into the Bundeswehr when reunification took place in 1990 and the Nationale Volksarmee (East Germany's armed forces) was dissolved. Some of their ancestors successively wore the uniform under the German Empire, the Weimar Republic and then the Third Reich.
New York Post
01-06-2025
- Automotive
- New York Post
Sen. Cory Booker roasted by pundits who accuse him of making Nazi salute at political event
Right-wing pundits ripped New Jersey Senator Cory Booker for making a gesture that they likened Nazi salute at the conclusion of a speech Saturday night — and compared it to the move Elon Musk made that was ripped by liberals. The Garden State Democrat made the gesture at a Democratic convention in California — placing his hand over his heart and then gesturing to the crowd with a straight arm and an open hand above shoulder height. Internet influencers were quick to jump on Booker's salute, and wonder where the outrage is when there was so much criticism by Booker's fellow Democrats and others on the left of Musk. 4 Sen. Cory Booker speaks at the California Democratic Party's 2025 State Convention at the Anaheim Convention Center in Anaheim, Calf. on May 31, 2025. AP 'If Elon Musk is a Nazi for doing this gesture.. Cory Booker is one too. Sorry, I don't make the rules,' one viral post read. 'Cory Booker did the thing. This is literally the Third Reich all over again. These are the darkest days ever. Democracy is doomed,' one user wrote sarcastically in a viral post. Some X users were more pointed in their criticism of the differing receptions Booker's and Musk's gestures each garnered from the pundit class. 'Same gesture. Different political party. Funny how that works,' Brandon Straka, founder of the Walk Away movement, wrote on X. 'This better be a national story for the next week!,' another X poster joked. 4 Booker makes the gesture, similar to the Nazi salute, during his speech. 4 Booker raises his fist in the air during his appearance in California. AP Former DOGE chief and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk infamously made a remarkably similar gesture at an inauguration celebration at the Capital One Arena back in January. 'Thank you for making it happen. Thank you, my heart goes out to you,' Musk said, placing his hand over his heart and then extending his arm to the crowd. Despite widespread public outcry over one-armed gesture's similarity to the Hitler salute, prominent figures in the Jewish community rose to Musk's defense. 'It seems that @elonmusk made an awkward gesture in a moment of enthusiasm, not a Nazi salute, but again, we appreciate that people are on edge,' antisemitism watchdog the ADL wrote on X at the time. 4 Elon Musk gestures to the crowd during the inaugural parade inside Capital One Arena on Jan. 20, 2025. AFP via Getty Images Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu wrote supportively on X, '@elonmusk is being falsely smeared. Elon is a great friend of Israel.' Senator Booker's office did not respond to The Post's request for comment.
Malaysiakini
30-05-2025
- Politics
- Malaysiakini
PM seeks shield fit for a king
Good morning. Here's our news and views that matter for today. Key Highlights PM seeks shield fit for a king Third Reich, Your Honour Shake-up at the top PM seeks shield fit for a king Anwar Ibrahim's unprecedented push for immunity from civil lawsuits has ignited a fierce debate over its constitutional legitimacy. Leading legal experts have voiced doubts about whether the Federal Constitution actually shields sitting prime ministers from such legal challenges. Several prominent lawyers tell Malaysiakini that, by and large, this kind of immunity does not extend to government officials. 'I think first and foremost, the concept that the prime minister of Malaysia has some form of legal immunity against civil suits or even criminal suits is something that the courts in Malaysia have not decided yet. 'In fact, the Federal Constitution only says that the Yang di-Pertuan Agong and state rulers have a certain degree of immunity. The Constitution does not bestow immunity to any other person, including the prime minister,' said Lim Wei Jiet. 'So I am not sure on which basis the prime minister's lawyers are framing these questions of law to the Federal Court, relying on Articles 39, 40, and 43, because those articles don't talk about immunity. They talk about the powers of the executives and the cabinet in general,' he added. HIGHLIGHTS Third Reich, Your Honour Lawyer Shafee Abdullah draws a dramatic parallel between the ongoing royal addendum hearing for ex-premier Najib Abdul Razak and the dark days of Nazi-era rule, taking aim at the presiding judge over what he claims is a serious misstep. 'A judicial decision means you hear both parties. Since when do we do a Nazi-Germany kind of hearing? You must hear both parties,' he exclaimed. This was related to the contempt of court proceedings launched by Najib's legal team against former attorney-general Ahmad Terrirudin Salleh, over his actions in 2024, where he declined to reveal in court the existence of a royal addendum ordering Najib to serve the remainder of his six-year jail term under house arrest. Shafee's complaint is that the judge made a decision administratively without hearing both sides, which he argues is improper and unfair. HIGHLIGHTS Shake-up at the top Following the resignations of PKR ministers Rafizi Ramli and Nik Nazmi Nik Ahmad, attention is squarely on Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim - what will his next move be in the upcoming cabinet reshuffle? Anwar stated that no discussions regarding a cabinet reshuffle have taken place and affirmed that such changes would not take place anytime soon. Khairy Jamaluddin, who is rumoured to make a comeback, has since downplayed the speculation, saying he is preoccupied with other matters. A reshuffle could additionally take place in Selangor, regardless of whether Menteri Besar Amirudin Shari moves to a federal post. The PKR election results are being cited to justify potential changes. HIGHLIGHTS Views that matter In case you missed it HIGHLIGHTS
