As Germany sought to rebuild itself [after 1918], establishing the rôles disabled people would hold in society became a means for German citizens to evaluate the success of the new democracy.¹⁰⁶ The 1919 Weimar Constitution, the governing document for the newly created [pseudo]democratic régime, promoted, amongst other things, equality, free speech and freedom to participate in one’s community; however, in practice, the disabled were not granted equal access to this right.¹⁰⁷
While “many remained objects of charity or social outcasts” and “appeared in freak shows,” others were “hidden away by their ashamed families,” perceived to be “crippled beggars” on the streets, or became the focal point for malicious jokes.¹⁰⁸ Of course, non‐disabled Germans undervaluing or preferring to avoid disabled communities does not equate to supporting “euthanasia” practices; however, it does highlight a preference for their removal and exclusion.
[…]
In West Germany, the history of [Fascism] was first treated with a “collective amnesia” during the 1940s and 1950s, where “postwar Germans suffered from an incapacity to ‘work through’ the traumas of the era [the Third Reich].”¹⁵³ It was during this period that [Fascist] perpetrators of “euthanasia” were tried at the Nuremberg Medical Trials from 1946 to 1947 (NMT) and at smaller West German courts.¹⁵⁴
Although Germans supported the larger trials, which convicted a handful of major war criminals, the successor trials, which included the NMT and proceedings in West German courts, involved moving beyond top [Fascist] officials and confronting the complicity to [Fascist] crimes, which permeated multiple levels of German society, and made it difficult for civilians to separate ‘Nazis’ from ‘Germans’.¹⁵⁵ Because of this, Hepburn argues that “the German public was simply not interested in the trial[s]” and Bryant claims they “were highly critical” of them.¹⁵⁶
Thus, the court proceedings failed to convey the seriousness of the atrocities committed against disabled Germans, an act that had ramifications on their postwar memorialization. The majority of the perpetrators of “euthanasia” crimes were never convicted, or served minimal sentences, and prejudiced perceptions of disabled victims were evident during German court proceedings.¹⁵⁷
During the 1951 to 1953 proceedings for Dr. Alfred Leu, who was called to trial for murdering disabled children, he was acquitted of his charges because the court agreed that Dr. Leu had “not acted maliciously ‘because the children or the mentally ill were guideless or defenseless in the first place”’ and that those he had killed were “low forms of existence with no perceptible emotional life”.¹⁵⁸
Even after medical professionals were brought to trial, and the horror of the “euthanasia” program was uncovered, many [Fascist] perpetrators of “euthanasia” did not believe they had committed crimes against disabled Germans.¹⁵⁹ This resulted in an extensive portion of the medical community from [the Third Reich] continuing to practice in postwar Germany and perpetuate their perceptions of disabled Germans.¹⁶⁰
Therefore, the cumulative treatment of “euthanasia” crimes in postwar Germany contributed to the delayed memorialization of disabled Germans because it established a precedent that they were not victims of [Fascism].
However, there were members of the German medical community that spoke out against [Fascist] “euthanasia”. Two early reports, written by Germans about the “euthanasia” program, include Alice Platen‐Hallermund’s The Killing of the Mentally Ill in Germany: From the German Medical Commission at the American Military Court, 1948 (Die Tötung Geisteskranker in Deutschland: Aus der deutschen Ärztekommission beim amerikanischen Militärgerricht) and Alexander Mitscherlich and Fred Mielke’s The Dictate of Contempt for Humanity (Das Diktat der Menschenverachtung), which was originally printed in 1947 and later reprinted in 1960 as Medicine without Humanity: Documents of the Nuremberg Medical Trial (Medizin ohne Menschlichkeit: Dokumente der Nürnberger Ärzteprozessess).¹⁶¹
However, neither work was reviewed in German medical journals because no German publisher was willing to distribute works discussing [Fascist] “euthanasia” until the 1960s.¹⁶²
The early works of Platen‐Hallermund, Mitscherlich and Mielke indicate that the crimes committed against disabled victims were not entirely disregarded, but the resistance they faced from the German medical community suggests their viewpoint was a minority. This enforced silence about [Fascist] “euthanasia” contributed to the delay in memorialization because it inhibited Germans from engaging with this area of the [Fascist era].
[…]
The 1980s also witnessed the beginning of disability studies and the use of disability as an analytical lens with which to examine the [Fascist era].¹⁶⁷ During this time disability also became equated with “gender and race as an analytical construct used to define what it means to be human”.¹⁶⁸
These changes re‐established people with disabilities as individuals worthy of scholarly exploration and aided in the recognition of disabled Germans as victims of [Fascist] policies. This assisted in their eventual memorialization within Germany, but this process was delayed due to continued discrimination towards disabled Germans.
The end of World War II did not bring about an immediate shift in societal perceptions of disabilities, even though West German society included a variety of disabled individuals: veterans, coercive sterilization survivors, those who had managed to evade death at a “euthanasia” centre, and those who developed a disability due to malnourishment or disease immediately following 1945.¹⁶⁹
Within West Germany, medical professionals deliberated how best to care for and integrate disabled veterans and those who had a disability due to illness into society; however, “in all these discussions there was almost never any reflection on the fate of disabled people under [Fascism] or the involvement of professionals and special education teachers in carrying out the policies of racial hygiene.”¹⁷⁰ These debates also defined who was labeled as disabled, which further excluded disabled survivors.
In the Federal Ministry for Labor and Social Affair’s commissioned work The Disabled and Physically Handicapped in the Struggle for Existence in Former Times and Today, 1956, the term disabled was reserved for “war or workplace victims whose health had been harmed in the service of society,” and those who failed to meet these requirements were deemed “physically handicapped.”¹⁷¹
Although some survivors of [Fascist] sterilization and “euthanasia” may have rejected both terms, disabled and physically handicapped, their segregation from the German government’s definition of disabled impacted their ability to receive financial support and government services.
Those who matched the Labor Ministry’s definition of disabled were eligible for pensions and the protection of welfare laws. Those whom the Labor Ministry deemed “physically handicapped” were also labeled as “non‐genuine disabled” and were expected to be cared for by their family, the church or a charity.¹⁷²
Therefore, the German government aided in the segregation of disabled victims of [Fascist] crimes from Germany’s disabled community; an act that contributed to their delayed memorialization because segregation and discrimination does not foster an environment for memorialization.
Furthermore, the notion that sterilization and “euthanasia” were medically sound actions permeated beyond Germany’s [Fascist] medical community, and influenced government legislation in both West Germany and reunified Germany.
In 1953, the West German government issued the Federal Law for the Compensation of the Victims of National Socialist Persecution (Entschädigungegesetz), which further segregated the more than 370,000 victims of sterilization and 300,000 “euthanasia” victims by denying them financial compensation for their suffering and official recognition as a victim group.¹⁷³ They were excluded because they were not viewed as victims of racial, religious, or political persecution.¹⁷⁴
Although [Fascist] crimes of sterilization and “euthanasia” were considered crimes against humanity, Germans who were sterilized under the 1933 sterilization law were viewed as having received genuine medical treatment.¹⁷⁵ It was not until 2007 that the 1933 […] sterilization law was officially declared unconstitutional.¹⁷⁶
However, victims of coercive sterilization still did not receive compensation under Entschädigungsgesetz, because their persecution was still not considered to have been racially or politically motivated.¹⁷⁷ This finally changed in 2011 when “euthanasia” victims were officially granted “equal status to those of other [Fascist] crimes” (eg. the Jews) by the German government.¹⁷⁸
However, it was not until 2017 that “euthanasia” victims were included in the German Parliament’s annual remembrance of victims of [Fascism], which takes place on January 27th.¹⁷⁹ Although disabled victims are now officially recognized as victims of [Fascist] crimes, it is evident that it took time for that to be socially accepted and expressed, which impacted and delayed the memorialization process.
It is arguable that one of the most significant factors in the marginalization of disabled victims from postwar memorialization in Germany is the lack of survivors and those who can lobby to promote the interests of the victims of [Fascist] euthanasia and coercive sterilization.¹⁸⁰ There were very few disabled survivors of the “euthanasia” program, and victims of sterilization have continued to face discrimination and ostracism, as this chapter has discussed and will explore further in Chapter Three within the context of deaf survivors.¹⁸¹
Overall, disabled Germans may not have been able to share their experiences because of their marginalized positions. “Marginalized groups can only contribute to the national memory ‘if they command the means to express their visions and if their vision [is] compatible [with] social or political objectives and inclinations.’”¹⁸²
Furthermore, arbitrary categories such as “feebleminded” and “deaf and dumb”, which developed credibility during the Weimar Republic and Third Reich, continued into the postwar years and perpetuated prejudiced categorization and discrimination of disabled Germans. Therefore, disabled Germans were hindered in their ability to advocate for themselves because there were a limited number of survivors and their voices were suppressed by a society that was unwilling to include the plight of disabled Germans in the narrative of [Fascist] crimes.¹⁸³
This directly impacts the memorialization process, because, once again, disabled Germans were recognized as victims of [Fascism].
(Emphasis added. Click here for more.)
Primary sources help increase education around deaf experiences, which is a necessary precursor to memorialization efforts; however difficulties in accessing this source material complicates this process. During his research for Crying Hands: Eugenics and Deaf People in Nazi Germany, Horst Biesold encountered difficulties accessing primary source material. […] At a school for the deaf in northern Germany, Biesold was initially granted permission to view the school’s registry; however, eight days later when Biesold requested access to the files of students who attended the school during Nazi rule, he was informed that all former student records had been destroyed a few days earlier.²⁷⁴
Biesold describes other encounters with deaf schools, where he was “kindly asked to cancel [his] visit” to the archives or simply denied access when he requested documents between the years of 1933 to 1945.²⁷⁵ Additionally, throughout the 1980s, government parties within West Germany “discouraged research into, and discussion of, the persecution and extermination of deaf persons under National Socialist rule.”²⁷⁶
This response by the West German government directly impacted the ability of West Germans, deaf and hearing, to explore this area of history, and contributed to the lack of attention that was given to deaf Germans and their past. The restricted access to material, imposed by both German schools for the deaf and the German government, directly hinder the memorialization process. Knowledge cannot be shared if it cannot be accessed. Furthermore, the limited access to the documents indicates that German bureaucrats were aware of aspects of the dark nature of the history of deaf Germans and did not want the information disseminated to the public.
The German government further impacted the memorialization of deaf Germans because they excluded deaf victims from the larger community of victims who suffered in the Third Reich. Grace Renwand states that the Federal Republic “did not see sterilization as a form of racial persecution; rather the law of compulsory sterilization had followed legal procedure”.²⁷⁷
Furthermore, it was not until 1981 that the Federal Republic financially compensated victims of coercive sterilization, and it was not until 1989 that the West German government recognized the deaf as victims of [Fascism].²⁷⁸ By 1995, Berlin was the first state to recognize deaf victims of forced sterilization as victims of the [Fascists], subsequently deeming them eligible for further government compensation.²⁷⁹ The treatment of the history of deaf Germans by the German state has directly impacted the scholarship written on the history of this victim group.²⁸⁰
Because deaf victims were largely ignored within the discourse of [Fascist] persecution, many scholars “ignored their experiences”, an act which “perpetuat[ed] the treatment of the deaf as second class.”²⁸¹ Scholarship has also been limited due to difficulties, such as Biesold’s, in accessing research materials.
Click here for events that happened today (July 14).
1816: Arthur de Gobineau, protofascist aristocrat and ‘race theorist’, arrived to make life worse for the world.
1889: Ante Pavelić, Axis dictator, stained humanity with his existence.
1894: Masaji Kitano, Axis commanding officer at Unit 731, came to life.
1897: Plaek Pibulsonggram, Axis collaborator, existed.
1918: Prince Egmont of Lippe‐Weißenfeld, Axis pilot, lived.
1922: Elfriede Rinkel, Axis concentration camp guard who used a dog to abuse prisoners, was tragically born.
1931: Reinhard Heydrich joined the NSDAP’s SS organization, receiving SS identification number 10,120.
1933: Through the Gleichschaltung decree, Berlin officially declared the NSDAP to be the Reich’s only legal political party, and it passed laws that allowed revocation of citizenship for naturalised Jews. In addition to that, the constitution of the new unified Reich church passed into law, thus giving the German Fascists control over the German church, and so did the idea of regular plebiscites. The Chancellor explained this latter action in a speech as to ensure that the acts of the new government ultimately received their ‘lawful legalization’ from the folk in a more direct form than the medium of parliamentary elections permitted, ie. he was in effect by‐passing the Reichstag. Lastly, the Third Reich’s eugenics programme commenced with the proclamation of the Law for the Prevention of Hereditarily Diseased Offspring requiring the compulsory sterilization of any citizen who suffers from alleged genetic disorders.
1938: Imperial diplomats in Moscow demanded that Soviet troops be removed from Bezymyannaya (Shachaofeng) and Zaozernaya (Changkufeng), west of Lake Khasan and Vladivostok in a contested region on the northeastern Chinese border. (The Soviets rejected the Imperial demands, citing Imperial violation of the First Convention of Peking of 1860 by occupying Chinese territory.)
1939: The Royal Romanian Air Force commenced operating the German‐built He 112 fighters.
1940: The Luftwaffe assaulted the Allied convoys in the English Channel, sinking or damaging only five ships despite the large number of aircraft sent. Luftwaffe bombers also attacked RAF airfield at Manston in Kent in southern England and a destroyer in Swanage Harbor, Dorset, causing little damage.
1941: Observing the Axis forces reaching the River Luga thus expecting a rapid victory in northern Russia, Berlin ordered the arms industry to switch production from guns and tanks to aircraft and submarines. Imperial Ambassador Hiroshi Oshima informed Reich Foreign Minister Joachim von Ribbentrop that, in regards to the request for the Empire of Japan to attack Vladivostok, Imperial Foreign Minister Yosuke Matsuoka was in agreement with the proposal but the Imperial cabinet in general disagreed with such a suggestion.
1942: The Axis commenced deporting Netherlandish Jews to Auschwitz, and it deported some German Jews from Theresienstadt (in occupied Czechoslovakia) to Minsk, Byelorussia and other locations in Eastern Europe. As well, the Axis slaughtered seven hundred people in reprisal in Zagreb, Yugoslavia for the murder of Gestapo chief SS Major Helm. Axis patrol boats damaged Soviet submarine ShCh‐317 in the ‘Nashorn’ minefield in the Baltic Sea; Finnish minelayer Ruotsinsalmi and patrol boat VMV‐6 followed the oil slick from ShCh‐317 and sank the damaged submarine with depth charges, killing all thirty‐eight aboard. Lastly, one dozen Axis frogmen attacked Gibraltar harbor in Operation GG1, and they damaged four cargo ships.
1943: Before the Axis commissioned submarines U‐429, U‐549, and U‐675 into service, its submarine U‐178 attacked transport ship Robert Bacon with torpedoes in the Indian Ocean thirty‐five miles off the Mozambique Light at 0236 hours. After the initial damage was brought under control, fifty‐two survivors began a relatively orderly evacuation of the ship with the three surviving lifeboats and three surviving rafts. At 0314 and then again at 0443, U‐178 fired additional torpedoes at the burning wreck, sinking her. U‐178 would surface to point to the survivors toward land before departing.
1944: Tōkyō announced the conscription of females between the ages of 12 and 40 for war‐related work, and Heinkel aircraft of III/KG3 flew twenty‐three sorties to launch V‐1 bombs against Southampton, England during the night. Most either missed the city or succumbed to night fighter interception. Nonetheless, one came down on Newcomen Road in Portsmouth massacring fifteen and another killed all members of a family that had fled London and were staying with friends in the small village of Goodworth Clatford. Aside from that, the Third Reich’s head of state departed his Berghof residence Berchtesgaden, never to return there again.
1945: The Axis transferred its submarine UIT‐24 to Kobe as I‐503 and under Lieutenant Hideo Hirota’s command. Likewise, Lieutenant Hideo Hirota became the commanding officer of both I‐503 (formerly Comandante Cappellini) and I‐504 (formerly Luigi Torelli).
1948: The neofascist Antonio Pallante severely injured the communist Palmiro Togliatti by shooting him three times, nearly murdering him and triggering an acute political crisis in Italy. Pallante never regretted his crime.