Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-gq7q9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-16T19:30:33.909Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Nazis Reform the Reich1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2013

Albert Lepawsky
Albert Lepawsky
Affiliation:
University of Chicago
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Revolutions shift power not only from one economic class to another, but also from one governmental level to another. Not only is there a new deal between industrialists and laborers, between financiers and merchants, between those in the higher and those in the lower income brackets, but the centers of strength also shift from one region to another and from one governmental authority to another; and there is a new balance of power between the province and the nation, between the city and the state.

Type
Foreign Governments and Politics
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 30 , Issue 2 , April 1936 , pp. 324 - 350
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1936

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

2 Reichsgesetzblatt, March 31, 1933, p. 153Google Scholar.

3 Ibid., March 24, 1933, p. 141.

4 Ibid., April 7, 1933, p. 173.

5 Ibid., January 30, 1934, p. 75.

6 Ibid., February 14, 1934, p. 89.

7 Ibid., January 30, 1935, p. 65.

8 Ibid., February 5, 1934, p. 85; February 3, 1934, p. 82; February 2, 1935, p. 74.

9 Ibid., February 3, 1934, p. 81.

10 The state delegations of the free city-state of Hamburg, for example, continued to operate in Berlin months after the law was passed. The French chargé at Munich was continued after the war on the basis of the preamble provision of the Treaty of Versailles which revived “the official relations with Germany and with the German states.” See also Dr.Nicolai, Helmut, Der Neuaufbau des Reiches nach dem Reichsreformgesetz vom 30. Januar, 1934, p. 55Google Scholar. This short study is No. 9 of a series entitled Das Recht der nationalen Revolution (Berlin, 1934)Google Scholar.

11 Das Program der N. S. D. A. P. This is point 25, the last in the Party Program.

12 Mein Kampf, Chap. 10.

13 Grundlagen der kommenden Verfassung (Berlin, 1933), pp. 32–34Google Scholar.

14 Deutsche Juristen Zeitung, 1934, p. 852Google Scholar.

15 Reichstag speech, March 23, 1933.

16 Nüremberg speech, September 1, 1933.

17 Radio address, January 31, 1934.

18 Ibid.

19 Nicolai, , Der Neuaufbau des Reiches, pp. 42–44Google Scholar.

20 Verhandlungen der National Versammlung, Vol. 328, p. 1801et. seq.Google Scholar

21 Nüremberg speech, September 1, 1933.

22 Reichstag speech, March 23, 1933.

23 Reichstag speech, January 30, 1934.

24 The only passage in Mein Kampf which may be cited by those who wish to show that regionalization is an original Nazi principle is the remote statement that “National Socialism must enforce its principles without regard for existing state boundaries,” p. 648. But the statement was made in discussing federalism, and the question of recasting state lines or of setting up regions is not taken up.

25 Dr.Schmitt, Carl, Das Reichsstatthaltergesetz, p. 12Google Scholar (No. 3, Das Recht der nationalen Revolution).

26 Reichsverwaltungsblatt und Preussisches Verwaltungsblatt, June 24, 1933, p. 510Google Scholar.

27 London Times, January 11, 1934.

28 Nicolai, , Der Neuaufbau des Reiches, p. 48Google Scholar.

29 Deutsche Juristen Zeitung, 1934, p. 852Google Scholar; 1935, pp. 227, 264.

30 Radio address, January 31, 1934.

31 Deutsoher Akademischer Austauschdienst, News in Brief, First November issue, 1934, p. 11.

32 Ibid., First April issue, 1935, p. 8.

33 Ibid., First June issue, 1935, p. 2.

34 Reichsgesetzblatt, January 30, 1934, p. 75Google Scholar; November 29, 1934, p. 1190.

35 Ibid., January 30, 1935, p. 66.

36 Ibid., Teil II, April, 1935, pp. 371, 379.

37 Reichsgesetzblatt, April 7, 1933, p. 173Google Scholar; January 30, 1935, p. 66; see also Deutsche Juristen Zeitung, March 1, 1935, p. 258Google Scholar.

38 Ibid., November 27, 1934, p. 1190.

39 Nationalsozialistisches Jahrbuch, 1934, pp. 139–141Google Scholar. Austria and Danzig, outside of Germany, each constitutes a separate district, making the total 33.

40 See section below on “Centralizing the Administration.”

41 Deutscher Akademischer Austauschdienst, News in Brief, December issue, 1934.

42 London Times, March 8, 1934.

43 See series entitled Veröffentlichungen des Hamburgisch Preussischen Landesplanungsausschusses (Hamburg, 1934)Google Scholar.

43a A Reich Bureau of Regional Regulation set up in 1935 has a more imposing title than its mere activity of studying population distribution suggests. See Reichsgesetzblatt, March 30, 1935, p. 468Google Scholar, and June 28, 1935, p. 793; News in Brief, First August issue, 1935.

44 Reichsreform und Landerkonferenz, Die Beratung und Beschlüsse der Landerkonferenz und ihrer Ausschüsse (Berlin, 1930)Google Scholar. But see the economic explanations of Nazi nationalism by Dr.Wehner, Bruno, “Trends in German Regional Planning,” The Planners' Journal, Sept.–Oct., 1935CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and following issues. For a draft of the Preuss proposal for “autonomous republics” and regions, see Kraus, Herbert, Germany in Transition. (Harris Foundation Lectures, University of Chicago Press, 1924), p. 201Google Scholar.

45 See Bau, Deutsche und Bodenbank, , Denkschrift über die Vorstädtische Kleinsiedlungen ihre bisherige Ergebnisse und Entwicklungstendenzen (1934)Google Scholar.

46 See, for example, the Reich Farm Inheritance Law, Reichsgesetzblatt, September 30, 1933, p. 685Google Scholar.

47 This is the number of unsuccessful attempts at boundary changes I have been able to discover through a variety of sources, but the figure is probably incomplete.

48 The returns by districts are given in the Hamburger Fremdenblatt, August 20, 1934.

49 London Times, May 5, 1934.

50 See “Karte der Deutsche Mundarten,” Brockhaus, , Konversations Lexikon, pp. 990–991Google Scholar.

51 See Hitler, Adolf, Mein Kampf, p. 646Google Scholar; Reichstag speech, January 30, 1934; Deutsche Juristen Zeitung, 1934, p. 1529Google Scholar; Nicolai, , Grundlagen der kommenden Verfassung, pp. 38–41, 84Google Scholar.

52 Under the 1933 census, Prussia covered 292,772 square kilometers of a German total of 468,780 (62.5 per cent). It contained 39,906,929 inhabitants out of a German total of 65,188,626 (61.2 per cent).

53 It has been estimated that there are some 200 German enclaves and exclaves. The figure is too small, even for Prussia alone. The community of Woltorf, for example, instead of having, as it was assumed, 13 territorial splinters, on closer examination was found to contain 172 separate exclave and enclave parcels. Landesdirektion der Provinz Hanover, Niedersachsen im Rahmen der Neugliederung des Reiches (Hanover, 1931)Google Scholar. I have been able to isolate not only the usual exclaves and enclaves, but (1) Uferexklaven, land surrounded by another state on three sides and by a body of water on the fourth; (2) Gebietszipfel, long projections of land into another state; (3) Verwaltungsexklaven, land administered but not owned by a state; (4) Gebietsplitterungen, nebulous land parcels accompanying an exclave; (5) Hoheitsteile, land over which a state possesses sovereignty but does not administer; and (6) Gemischtehoheitsteile, parcels of mixed sovereignty.

54 See also Wells, Roger H., German Cities (Princeton, 1932), pp. 16–21Google Scholar.

55 Preussische Gesetzsammlung, June 3, 1921, p. 379Google Scholar.

56 Jeserich, Kurt, Die Preussischen Provimen (Berlin, 1931)Google Scholar; Wells, , German Cities, p. 20Google Scholar.

57 Reichsgetetzblatt, November 27, 1934, p. 1190Google Scholar.

58 Reichsgesetzblatt, April 7, 1933, p. 173; January 30, 1935, p. 66Google Scholar.

59 Deutsche Juristen Zeitung, May 1, 1935.

60 Jeserich, , Die Preussischen Provinzen, pp. 284–285Google Scholar.

61 Verhandlungen der National Versammlung, Vol. 326, p. 463, et seq.Google Scholar

62 Hitler, , Mein Kampf, p. 625Google Scholar.

63 Schuman, , The Nazi Dictatorship, p. 52Google Scholar.

64 See Göring, , Germany Reborn (London, 1934), especially pp. 135–141Google Scholar.

65 See Deutscher Akademischer Austauschdienst, News in Brief, December issue, 1934.

66 Ibid., October issue, 1934, January issue, 1935.

67 Reichsgesetzblatt, February 19, 1934, p. 91Google Scholar.

68 Ibid., December 5, 1934, pp. 1214–1215.

69 Ibid., January 30, 1934, pp. 68–69.

70 Ibid., July 3, 1934, p. 568.

71 Deutsche Juristen Zeitung, 1934, pp. 1340–1341Google Scholar. Deutscher Akademischer Austauschdienst, News in Brief, December issue, 1934; April issue, 1935.

72 Reichsgesetzblatt, January 30, 1935, pp. 49–64Google Scholar. For details, see following section on “Gleichschalting the Personnel.” See also, Surén, and Loschelder, , Die Deutsche Gemeindeordnung (Berlin, 1935)Google Scholar.

73 Fiehler, Karl. Nationalsocialistische Gemeindepolitik (1932), p. 29Google Scholar; Staatskom-missar Dr.Strolin, , “Gemeindeund Mittelstand,” Berliner Kommunale Mitteilungen, June 15, 1933, p. 97Google Scholar; also published in Die Nationalsozialistische Gemeinde, July 15, 1933, pp. 22–23Google Scholar; Staatssekretär Fritz Reinhardt, “Der Reinhardtsche Steuer-Reformplan” Berliner Lokal Anzeiger, July 1934.,

74 By March 31, 1933, when the Nazis definitely had come into power, the municipal and district debt was 11,330,000,000 marks, which was about the same as the Reich debt exclusive of the reparations and foreign debt (11,602,000,000 marks). United Kingdom, Department of Overseas Trade, Economic Conditions in Germany to June, 1934, p. 52.

75 Statistics compiled by the Kommunalwissenschaftliches Institut, Berlin. See also Dr.Morawski, “Die Auswirkung der Marxistischen Misswirtschaft,” Berliner Kommunale Mitteilungen, April 15, 1933, p. 61Google Scholar.

76 “Staatsekretär Fritz Reinhardt, Der Reinhardtsche Steuer-Reformplan,” Berliner Lokal Anzeiger, July, 1934Google Scholar.

77 Ibid., Dr. Markmann, “Die Aufgaben der Gemeinden in nationalen Staat,” Reichsverwaltungsblatt und Preussisches Verwaltungsblatt, June 10, 1933.

78 Fritz Reinhardt, op. cit.

79 Dr.Goetz, Harry, “Gesunde Geimeinden Gesunden Staat,” Berlin Kommunale Mitteilungen, December 20, 1933, pp. 269–270Google Scholar.

80 See Gutachten des Reichsparkommissar (1932); see also Reichgesetzblatt, August 24, 1931, p. 453Google Scholar.

81 See the Municipal Statute Reichsgesetzblatt, January 30, 1935, sec. 67; Jeserich, Kurt “Gemeinde und Wirtschaft,” Deutsche Gemeinde Beamten Zeitung, June 3, 1934, p. 316Google Scholar; see also Deutsche Juristen Zeitung, February 1, 1935. But cf. Feder, Gottfried, “Die Zukunft der Öffentlichen Wirtschaft,” Jahrbuch für Kommunalwissenschaft, 1934, Vol. IGoogle Scholar.

82 Berliner Kommunale Mitteilungen, June 5, 1934, p. 218Google Scholar; Ministerialdirektor Dr.Suren, , “Zur Deutschen Gemeindeordnung” Deutsche Juristen Zeitung, February 15, 1935, p. 202Google Scholar.

83 Reichgesetzblatt, January 30, 1935, secs. 4, 15.

84 See Frankfurter Zeitung, April 14, 1929.

85 Veröffentlichungen des Hamburgisch Preussischen Landesplanungsausschusses; Hamburger Fremdenblatt, September 15, 1933.

86 “Die Aenderungen des Kommunalrechts,” Der Gemeindetag, December 20, 1933, pp. 558–561Google Scholar.

87 Preussische Gesetzsammlung, June 29, 1934, p. 319Google Scholar; Jahrbuch für Kommunalwissenschaft, 1934, Vol. IIGoogle Scholar. The general German Municipal Statute does not apply to Berlin, Sec. 122.

88 Fiehler, Karl, Nationalsozialistische Gemeindepolitik, pp. 48–49 (National-sozialistisehe Bibliotek, No. 10, 1932)Google Scholar.

89 Dr.Jeserich, Kurt, “Die Gemeinde im Nationalsozialistischen Staat,” Der Gemeindetag, August 15, 1933, pp. 309–311Google Scholar; Professor Dr. Arnold Kottgen-Greifswald, “Die Neuordnung der kommunalen Selbstverwaltung,” ibid., December 20, 1933, pp. 545–552.

90 Ibid., Dr. Markmann “Die Aufgaben der Gemeinden im nationalen Staat,” Reichsverwaltungsblatt und Preussisches Verwaltungsblatt, June 10, 1933, p. 461 “Runderlass von Ministerpräsident Göring,” Berliner Kommunale Mitteilungen January 5, 1934, p. 2Google Scholar.

91 Fiehler, Karl, Nationalsozialistische Gemeindepolitik, p. 67Google Scholar; Reich Minister Dr.Frick, , “Reich und Gemeinden eine Einheit,” Berliner Kommunale Mitteilungen, February 20, 1934, p. 62Google Scholar.

92 Ford, Guy Stanton, Stein and the Era of Reform in Prussia (Princeton, 1922), Chap. 8Google Scholar.

93 Reichsgesetzblatt, January 30, 1935, p. 49Google Scholar.

94 Preussische Gesetzsammlung, December 18, 1933, p. 427Google Scholar.

95 See articles by P. Sieben, “Gegen die Philister, Miesmacher, und Nörgler,” Krause, Willibald, “Die Verwaltung der Gemeinden in den früheren deutschen Kolonien,” June 3, 1934, pp. 310, 327Google Scholar.

96 Treff, Bürgermeister, “Das Gemeindeverbandwesen in Deutschland,” Berliner Kommunale Mitteilungen, February 20, 1935, p. 62Google Scholar.

97 Ibid.

98 Reichsgesetzblatt, December 15, 1933, pp. 1065–1067Google Scholar.

99 Dr.Goebbels, , “Das erwachende Berlin,” Berliner Kommunale Mitteilungen, January 5, 1934, p. 18Google Scholar.

100 Reichsgesetzblatt, August 2, 1934, p. 747Google Scholar; August 3, 1934, p. 757. See statement of Dr.Frick, , Reich Minister of the Interior, August 13, 1934Google Scholar.

101 Reichsgesetzblatt, January 30, 1935, p. 65, sec. 4Google Scholar.

102 A Berlin commissar was appointed on March 15, 1933, soon after the Nazis took over the government, and the necessary laws were published on May 31, 1934. Deutsche Gemeindebeamten Zeitung, April 22, 1934, pp. 212–213Google Scholar. The party representative for other cities is mentioned in the Reich Municipal Statute of January 30, 1935, secs. 41, 51, 55.

103 Reichsgesetzblatt, January 30, 1935, p. 65, sec. 5Google Scholar.

104 Ibid., p. 54, sec. 41.

105 Ibid., p. 54, sec. 51.

106 Ibid., p. 65, sec. 7.

107 Schuman, Frederick L., The Nazi Dictatorship (New York, 1935), p. 251Google Scholar.

108 Berger, Erich, Berlin Wird Deutsch (Berlin, 1933)Google Scholar.

109 Treppe, H., “Die Reinigungsaktion in den einzigen Bezirken Gross-Berlins,” Berliner Kommunale Mitteilungen, July 1, 1933, pp. 121–122Google Scholar.

110 Fiehler, Karl, Nazi Gemeindepolitik, p. 71Google Scholar. See Wells, R. H., German Cities, p. 262Google Scholar.

111 Deutscher Akademischer Austauschdienst, News in Brief, First February issue, 1935, p. 3.

112 Reichsgesetzblatt, January 30, 1935, p. 65, sec. 4Google Scholar.

113 Ibid., sec. 3.

114 Ibid., sec. 33, et. seq.

115 Statement of Dr. Frick, Minister of the Interior, Deutscher Akademischer Austauschdienst, News in Brief, First June issue, 1935, pp. 2–3.

Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.