Читаем The End: The Defiance and Destruction of Hitler’s Germany, 1944–1945 полностью

There was no need to get too worked up ‘because they have killed a few people in East Prussia. After all, what does human life amount to here in Germany.’82

The Reich was a large country. And Stuttgart was almost as far from Nemmersdorf as it was possible to be. Revealing as these reported remarks are about knowledge of German crimes against humanity, especially of genocidal actions towards Jews, the people of Stuttgart could feel that there was much distance between themselves and whatever Soviet atrocities had taken place on the Reich’s easternmost borders. The population of the eastern areas of Germany had every reason to be more alarmed at the proximity of the Red Army. For ordinary civilians, helplessly squeezed between the refusal of the Party authorities to evacuate them westwards and the oncoming assault from demonized enemy forces, the horror propaganda from Nemmersdorf almost certainly helped to induce a sense of intense fear. Certainly, there was profound relief when the Wehrmacht beat off the incursion and some stability returned to the area.83 In trumpeting the successes in repelling the enemy, propaganda did not hesitate to emphasize the value of all the work that had gone into building the fortifications in the east, which, it was claimed, had held up the Red Army. The Volkssturm engagement was also glorified.84 But Goebbels was keen not to overplay the ‘miracle of East Prussia’. It was important, he remarked, ‘not to praise the day before evening’.85 This was a sensible sentiment. When the Red Army returned to East Prussia, this time to stay, in January 1945, blind panic, not determination to fight to the last, characterized the behaviour of the vast majority of the civilian population of the region.

It would be as well, however, not to presume that scepticism or cynicism about the propaganda reports about Nemmersdorf meant that Goebbels’ efforts had been fruitless. Contrary to indications that the atrocity stories had failed in their impact, the summary report from propaganda offices in mid-November claimed that those who had initially doubted the written accounts had altered their views in the light of the published photographs. People were ‘filled with hatred’, ready to fight to the extreme.86 However varied the response of the civilian population had been, it seems certain that for two groups in particular—groups that bore power—Nemmersdorf carried a message less of panic than of the need to hold out at any cost.

For representatives, high and low, of the Nazi Party and its affiliates, the violence and cruelty of the invaders in East Prussia had offered a foretaste of what seemed certain to await them should they fall into Soviet hands. Hitler himself reacted characteristically to the news and pictures from Nemmersdorf. ‘He swore revenge and fanned the flames of hatred,’ his most junior secretary, Traudl Junge, later wrote. ‘ “They’re not human beings any more, they’re animals from the steppes of Asia, and the war I am waging against them is a war for the dignity of European mankind,” he fumed. “We have to be hard and fight with all the means at our disposal.”’87 Hitler, least of all, was under no illusions about his fate should the Soviets capture him. On no account could that be allowed to happen. The route he would eventually take out of catastrophic defeat was already prefigured. He had informed the Gauleiter of Vienna and former Hitler Youth leader, Baldur von Schirach, as early as mid-1943 that the only way he could end the war was by shooting himself in the head.88

He extended the implications of his own fate to that of the German people. He had told his assembled Gauleiter as long ago as October 1943 that the German people had burnt their bridges; the only way was forward. Their very existence was at stake.89 He was not alone in the sentiment that there was nothing to lose. Goebbels was glad that bridges had been burnt; it bound people to the cause. In informing Party leaders of the mass killing of the Jews the previous autumn, Himmler had also been deliberately spreading the complicity, so that those present knew that there was no escape from the conspiracy of the implicated.90 At lower levels of the Party, too, the behaviour of many functionaries on the approach of the enemy—attempts to conceal membership of Nazi organizations, burning insignia, hiding uniforms and, most commonly, flight—betrayed their anxieties about what awaited them if they fell into enemy hands. But where the petty apparatchiks might hope for safety in obscurity, the Nazi bigwigs were left with no obvious choice other than to hold out. Desperation bred determination.

Перейти на страницу:

Похожие книги

1917 год: русская государственность в эпоху смут, реформ и революций
1917 год: русская государственность в эпоху смут, реформ и революций

В монографии, приуроченной к столетнему юбилею Революции 1917 года, автор исследует один из наиболее актуальных в наши дни вопросов – роль в отечественной истории российской государственности, его эволюцию в период революционных потрясений. В монографии поднят вопрос об ответственности правящих слоёв за эффективность и устойчивость основ государства. На широком фактическом материале показана гибель традиционной для России монархической государственности, эволюция власти и гражданских институтов в условиях либерального эксперимента и, наконец, восстановление крепкого национального государства в результате мощного движения народных масс, которое, как это уже было в нашей истории в XVII веке, в Октябре 1917 года позволило предотвратить гибель страны. Автор подробно разбирает становление мобилизационного режима, возникшего на волне октябрьских событий, показывая как просчёты, так и успехи большевиков в стремлении укрепить революционную власть. Увенчанием проделанного отечественной государственностью сложного пути от крушения к возрождению автор называет принятие советской Конституции 1918 года.В формате a4.pdf сохранен издательский макет.

Димитрий Олегович Чураков

История / Образование и наука