Neo-Nazis now in control of the Burschenschaften (student fraternities)

Fraternities at American colleges and universities are, for the most part, non-political drinking and partying clubs.  Not so in Germany.  The Burschenschaften  - or student duelling clubs - have a long tradition of ultra-nationalist extremism dating back to the 19th century.  Along the way they have adopted the racial ideology espoused by the Nazis and today seek to remain a pure "Aryan" organization: 

The antiquated world of Germany's student duelling clubs faced disintegration after nearly half of their members threatened to quit their national umbrella organisation because of row about Nazi-style "Aryan" identity cards and a decision to label an opponent of Adolf Hitler a "traitor".

Germany has more than a hundred conservative and liberal-nationalist student duelling clubs or Burschenschaften. They claim an almost exclusively male following of about 10,000. Members wear 19th century uniforms, and take part in torch-lit processions, ritualised fencing and beer drinking competitions.

The Ariernachweis or "Aryan Certificate" was required by all public sector employees in Nazi Germany beginning in 1933.  To obtain the Nachweis one had to present 7 birth certificates (employee, parents and grandparents) proving racially-pure German heritage.  This is what the Burschenschaften want to require of all members. 

Just as disturbing as the embrace of Nazi ideology is Burschenschaften's revisionist understanding of history.  One of the student leaders - Norbert Weidner - published a letter recently accusing the great theologian Dietrich Bonhoeffer - who was executed by the Nazis in 1945 - of treason (Landesverrat).  You can read the entire letter (pdf warning) here. For Norbert Weidner, Bonhoeffer's sentence and execution was "legally justified."

Rein juristisch halte ich die Verurteilung für gerechtfertigt. … wenn ich den Verrat in Kriegszeiten beurteile, der dazu führt, daß Deutsche an der Front zu Tausenden hingemetzelt werden, ist ein solches Urteil nachvollziehbar. Auf Landesverrat hat zu allen Zeiten und vor allem während des Krieges im schlimmsten Fall der Tod gestanden, ganz gleich, welche Staatsform regierte.

(From a purely legal standpoint I consider the conviction justified.  When I condemn treason in times of war - treason that results in the slaughter of thousands of German on the front, then such a verdict is understandable. Treason against one's country has always - but especially in wartime - been a capital crime - regardless which type of government was in power.)

Why should we care about about a bunch of right-wing students wearing funny hats?  The Burschenschaftler may be relatively small in numbers, but they are well-connected in government and business.  The groups are a highly effective networking engine. When I worked at Deutsche Bank in the 1980s and 1990s I encountered a number of managers who got their positions through their membership in a Burschenschaft. 

See also Germany's Burschenschaften and the Dream of Racial Purity

Comments

[Zyme]

Based upon this I had a look at Bonhoeffer's biography. I did know where he was executed, as the KZ is very close to where I grew up. However I did not know why.

David, he participated in plans to kill Hitler - say, what more COULD he have done to become a convicted traitor?

Honestly, do you know of ONE absolutist society in the history of mankind where trying to kill the head of state without success was taken sportsmanlike?

This is so ridiculous. Today you can be persecuted and have to face criminal charges in Germany for saying someone like him is a traitor. In my eyes, this rather shows in what an unreal society we live in Germany - today!

[David]

Dietrich Bonhoeffer was a brilliant theologian and writer - who also had the courage of his convictions. If only he and the other conspirators had succeeded!

As a student I read his prison letters - "Widerstand und Ergebung" - and that is a big reason why I consider myself a Christian today.

[FabMax]

@Zyme: The position that Bonhoeffer was a traitor is somewhat debatable. Technically, the nazis and their ilk were the traitors to the German state, since the Weimar constitution never was abolished.

You could say that Bonhoeffer acted to prevent more harm coming to the German people and the state. Is that traitorous?

[Zyme]

David how could we ever agree on anything, with you joining the religion I struggled so hard to free myself from :-)

@ Fabmax: Your definition would leave no room for changing the type of government, as every constitution outlaws that by default, thus making everyone pursuing a different path in the future a "traitor".
I would rather say that the safe definition of a traitor is someone who turns against the government which the governed people recognizes as such.

Now while I don't doubt that a lot of harm was caused to the German people in the end, from what I read Bonhoeffer did his best to undermine the government from the start - completely independent from harm caused to the German people at the end of the war.

[Hattie]

Zyme indulges himself in a kind of reasoning that is supposed to show how smart he is. But most of us are not fooled by his sophistry.

[Zyme]

I presume there is no need for a tone which might be mistaken as outright hostility, am I right?

Should you care to enlighten us with your own ideas, surely everyone will be excited.

[David]

Come on, Zyme, don't be so sensitive. Not everyone has your nationalistic fervor!

[Hattie]

Especially not German nationalistic fervor.

[FabMax]

@Zyme: Again, the Weimar constitution never was abolished. It technically was still as valid in 1945 as it was in 1925. The Nazi's rule violated its tenets from day one. Hitler violated the oath he swore the day he was instated as chancellor.

The Nazis didn't change the type of government. They didn't bother with that. That makes them traitors to the German people.
If they had gotten rid of the constitution, and replaced it with something else, you probably would be right in your statement.

The Weimar constitution granted people freedom of speech, so Bonhöffer didn't "undermine" anything, he made use of his rights, seeing the Nazis as dangerous as they turned out to be. It's just that in the end, he didn't see any other way than using violence; something I'm sure he had been ready to suffer the consequences in a just trial, not the abominations the Nazis called courts of justice.

[David]

FabMax - good points, but I thought Hitler invoked the "Ermächtigungsgesetz" which provided at least a veneer of legality to the seizure of power.

In any event, I believe Zyme is a lawyer and can give his opinion.

[Zyme]

I'm no expert with regards to the Machtergreifung - or Machtuebertragung, as it is called these days due to fact that the National Socialists used mostly legitimate means to assume control.

The most visible breach of Weimar's constitution was when Hitler declared himself as Fuhrer after Hindenburg's death (who was President), as such an office did not exist in the constitution.

However focusing on 1933/34 neglects the fact that defining a traitor by violating an existing constitution would create an endless list of traitors.
The Weimar Republic itself was imposed on the Germans in 1918/19 violating the Monarchy's constitution in place beforehand.
Grudgingly the German people accepted the republic at first - but would you call those who actively supported the Republic traitors?

The German people also accepted the Third Reich - slightly less grudgingly one might add. Now if you don't call the Weimar republicans traitors, surely you cannot call the national socialists as such.

A constitution is nothing more than a piece of paper in which activists try to extend the present distribution of power to the future. It is - in some cases sooner and in others later - always bound to fail applying to the future at some point. So focusing the definition of a traitor on that won't help.

However a traitor can be easily identified by betraying his nation via falling in its back during the hour of utmost need, namely during wartime.

[Jake]

@Zyme

"Now while I don't doubt that a lot of harm was caused to the German people in the end, ..."

"..... - completely independent from harm caused to the German people at the end of the war."

So, harm has not been done by the Nazis to the German People/Others until the End ... of the War?

No Wunder you support/excuse the Burschenschaft today, rather than to oppose Them.

[Jake]

Sorry, for the brownish Link, but these are some of them People, who also support and defend the Burschenschaft: http://www.pi-news.net/2012/11/medienmanipulation-uber-burschenschaften/

The, on this Link posted, Report on the Burschenschaft from 3-Sat, is also pretty correct in Case, that you really don't want nor need any of this kind of Morons in any kind of social nor politcal Positions/Power. Not at All!!!

[Zyme]

:-) Jake if you read again the context of my sentences you quoted, you may (or may not) notice that your conclusion is far-fetched.

In any event, leftists and internationals can complain all day, Burschenschaften will not disappear no matter how hard you may wish them to do so. Does it really suprise you so much that in Germany (of all countries) there are academics who focus on Germany, instead of Europe or the globe?

Also there is no reason for fear-mongering:

A) Burschenschafter will not take to the streets. In contrast, their political life consists out of abstence. Abstence and waiting for a change when they can assume political responsibility.
-> Up until such a point of time, it is quite unlikely that you will ever hear of them (apart from left wing propaganda).

B) And in case such a change occurred, you would no longer need to warn others of them, as they would be in power already.

Do you get the point?

[Jake]

Oh Yes, I get your Point!

If I wanna quote everything you said I don't like at All, I would have to quote it All!

I am just and not at All a blunt Patriot/Nationalist for Nobody on this Planet! I'm just born here and People like you always make this Accident less Fun. ...

[Zyme]

Goodness, I didn't want to spoil your fun.
Why is it people of your attitude have such a bad mood most of the time? You got to take things more lightly.

For instance, when I read your thoughts and realize that you differ greatly from my point of view, does it spoil my mood? Not at all, why should it.

If I wanted to only communicate with people who agree to everything I believe, I would not be here, would I.

[David]

Zyme,you always put me in a good mood, even though I usually disagree with you you.

[Jon]

Germans are most frat boys and sorority girls in the US too. Pay for your friends get duked by killers and right wingers!