“Is Hitler Racist Enough?”

The Struggle for Hegemony within the völkisch Movement in the North

German Countryside

Who were the German Racists?

• Deutsch-völkisch Freiheitspartei (DVFP), founded December 1922 after radical anti-Semites ejected from German Nationalist People’s Party, banned 1923

• February 1924 electoral alliance with NSDAP as Völkisch-Sozial Bloc (VSB)

• After successful May 1924 election campaign, DVFP tried to gain hegemony within the racist movement while Hitler loyalists tried to maintain their independence

• In run up to May 1928 election, DVFP tried to exploit rural unrest through alliance with Landvolk- und Mittelstandspartei as the Völkisch-National Bloc (VNB)

Locating the study

Percentages of votes cast for the competing völkisch parties, May 1928

German Racist/Nazi competition, May 1928

Votes Percentage of total vote

Percentage of Racist vote

NSDAP 30,195 7.8% 69.3%

VNB 13,379 3.5% 30.7%

Polling place leader

100% of vote

0% with competition

0% both parties

NSDAP 235 39 95 12

VNB 301 97 39 12

tied 12

Not available 16

126 places with vote range 33.3-66.6%

37 places with vote range 45-55%

The “Noakes” Thesis

• The German Racists tried to exploit concerns about Point 21 in the Nazi Party program

• Consequently, the German Racists did best among well-to-do farmers in the fertile Marsch areas, while the Nazis did better among poor farmers on the less fertile Geest

Leaflet

Racists as a matter of course recognize private property as the essential basisof any culture. Is it völkisch when the program of the NSDAP demands a law for the uncompensated nationalization of land? Or is that Marxism?

To be völkisch is to fight all three super-national powers: the Free Masons, theJesuits, and the Jews. Hitler does notfight against Rome and the Jesuits. …He is only interested in the Jews.

Data analysis of the “Noakes” Thesis

Party P-value

VNB 0.243

NSDAP 0.015

Correlation of land tax/hectare to percentage of votes cast for the Völkisch-National Bloc and the NSDAP

Data analysis of the “Noakes” Thesis

Party P-value

VNB 0.243

NSDAP 0.015

Pop/den P-value

VNB 0.001

NSDAP 0.000

Agrarianism P-value

VNB 0.000

NSDAP 0.003

Liberalism P-value

VNB 0.159

NSDAP 0.000

Regression analysis

VNB VNB NSDAP NSDAP

P-value R-squared P-value R-squared

Tax/Den 0.003 2.0% 0.000 3.0%

Tax/Liberal 0.000 3.4% 0.000 6.2%

Tax/Agrarian 0.000 3.9% 0.000 4.3%

Tax/Den/Agrarian 0.000 5.2% 0.000 5.7%

Tax/Den/Liberal 0.000 5.1% 0.000 8.1%

Den/Agrarian 0.001 2.6% 0.000 2.4%

Den/Liberal 0.000 4.5% 0.000 6.0%

Mapping the “Noakes” Thesis

The Hamilton Thesis• In his extensive statistical analysis of Weimar

voting patterns based on county-level data, Richard Hamilton argued that within majority Protestant areas, the major factors determining the growing support for National Socialism were– Innovative, energetic local activists– Support from the “establishment” press

• Establishment press support was non-existent in northwest before 1932, only one Nazi newspaper in study area

Leading party within the völkisch block by polling place, May 1928

Areas exhibiting National Socialist dominance

Areas exhibiting German Racist dominance

Voß

Fetz

Bohnens

Carolinensiel

Wilhelmshaven was a center of anti-Semitic agitation since 1919

Carolinensiel•1925: 1530 inhabitants•Votes/percentages• 1924 (283/49.9%)• 1928 • VNB (204/39.8%)• NSDAP (44/8.6%)

Carolinensiel

• Wilhelmshaven was a center of anti-Semitic agitation since 1919

• Carolinensiel• 1925: 1530 inhabitants• Votes/percentages• 1924 (283/49.9%)• 1928 • VNB (204/39.8%)• NSDAP (44/8.6%)

Carolinensiel

Heinrich van Dieken•Son of a school teacher•War veteran•School teacher in Carolin-

ensiel since 1918•Well-liked, active in DVSTB and DVFP•Member of the Prussian Landtag, 1924-1930•Refused to join NSDAP

Conclusions

• The “Noakes” Thesis does not stand up to statistical or spatial analysis

• GIS helps us understand what other factors were perhaps more important– Existing historical political patterns– The importance of strong personalities who were

able to bend local voting behavior to their will