ProQuest - NSDAP | Title List (PDF) - ProQuest.com

German Nationalism, National Socialism and Postwar Reconstruction 1918–1949
2. The SS, the SA, the Wehrmacht:
Militarism And Defense
Perhaps no element of German history after 1918 better illustrates the swift evolution of the national selfconsciousness
than the rise of militarism. The German army returned home defeated (or merely betrayed,
depending upon one’s viewpoint), to a ruined economy and a chaotic political system, which was made worse
by the provisions of the Treaty of Versailles. The latter imposed debilitating reparations payments on the
Germans and became a rallying cry for various political factions of the Weimar Republic, including the
burgeoning NSDAP. The sense of injustice at the terms of Versailles was united in the popular consciousness
with a romantic image of the valorous German army, which had won the Great War in military terms—yet
lost it due to weak domestic political leadership. As a consequence, a cult of militancy and a national mood of
resentment for the forcible pacification of Germany were prominent features of the political climate in the
fifteen years following World War I.
Drawing upon this national sympathy for militancy and a deep-seated desire to redeem the honor of the armed
forces, National Socialism’s most vivid public displays were deliberately linked with the notions of German
rearmament and the militarization of everyday life. The two key institutions behind this public face of
militancy were the SS (Schutzstaffel, or ‘Security Squad,’ a kind of Praetorian Guard) and—until its
emasculation by Hitler in 1934 after the Nazi rise to power—the SA (Sturmabteilung, or ‘Storm Troops’).
After Hitler’s seizure of power, the need to mend fences with the regular German armed forces and,
increasingly, to prepare the country for a war footing, led to a gradual assimilation of Wehrmacht leadership
into the NSDAP fold. It was also one of the practical grounds for the marginalization of the SA and the
liquidation of its top leadership—it was perceived as a rival and potential threat by members of the regular
armed forces.
All three of these institutions possessed their own highly sophisticated structures and organizational tenets,
with ranks, insignia, uniforms, rules, and norms and all the other paraphenalia of military regimen. Each
aspect was duly documented in a flood of publications, sometimes restricted for security reasons to the
respective leadership echelons of each group, and at other times distributed more widely with a view toward
intimidating potential adversaries or attracting potential members. The common concerns of military societies
are everywhere in evidence: chain of command, order in the ranks, strategy and tactics, weaponry, troop
morale, soldierly skills, the fiscal aspects of war—all come together to illustrate a society being inexorably led
towards mobilization for a global war of unprecedented proportions.
www.umi.com/research | umisalesinfo@il.proquest.com | 800.521.0600 ext. 2793 or 734.761.4700 ext. 2793 15