Hitler and the Forgotten Nazis (2 page)

The Austrian Nazis, or at least those who remained loyal to Hitler, fit neatly into this definition of fascism. Yet they were by no means the only group in Austria to do so. Indeed, it was the widespread nature of many of these concepts that for many years diluted the Nazis’ appeal and limited their growth.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

A host of individuals and institutions have given me invaluable assistance during the many years I have been studying Austrian Nazism and fascism. My initial research trip to Austria in 1963-64 was made possible by the Fulbright-Hays fellowship program. Subsequent research since 1972 has been supported by stipends from the National Endowment for the Humanities and the American Philosophical Society. Additional financial assistance has come from faculty development grants from Florida Atlantic University (in cooperation with Robert Schwarz) and the University of Central Florida. The latter institution also generously provided me with released time from teaching and a sabbatical leave.

I was able to broaden my knowledge of international fascism in 1974 by attending a conference on Comparative European Nazism and Fascism sponsored by the Department of Sociology at the University of Bergen, Norway. Equally valuable was an eight-week seminar at Vanderbilt University in 1976, “Europe in the Age of Fascism, 1919-1945: A Historical Re-examination,” supported by the National Endowment for the Humanities and directed by Professor Charles F. Delzell, who also read portions of my manuscript.

In Europe my studies were greatly aided by Anton Porhansl of the Fulbright Commission in Vienna, and Gerhard Jagschitz and the late Ludwig Jedlicka of the Institut fur Zeitgeschichte. Numerous librarians and archivists assisted me at the Austrian Nationalbibliothek and at the
Tagblatt
Archive of the Arbeiterkammer, both also in Vienna. Professor Walter Goldinger permitted me to use the resources of the Allgemeines Verwaltungsarchiv. The late Friedrich Vogl, and Dr. Herbert Steiner were especially accommodating at the Dokumentationsarchiv des osterreichischen Widerstandes. Daniel P. Simon, the director of the Berlin Document Center, facilitated my use of the records of the Nazi party. The staff of the Bundesarchiv in Koblenz, West Germany, was extremely efficient in helping me to utilize the Schumacher Collection of

Austrian Nazi correspondence. In this country, Robert Wolfe, the chief of the Modern Military Branch of the Military Archives Division of the National Archives provided me with copies of the Nuremberg interrogations.

Dr. Gerhard Botz, director of the Ludwig Boltzmamrlnstitut fur Historische Sozialwissenschaft at the University of Salzburg, on several occasions sent me valuable documents and recent publications. Professors Andrew G. Whiteside of Queens College of the City University of New York, John Haag of the University of Georgia, Ronald Smelser of the University of Utah, Maurice Williams of Okanagan College, British Columbia, and Robert Schwarz of Florida Atlantic University all read the manuscript with critical insight and provided me with many useful suggestions. Professor Richard Adicks of the UnireVsity of Central Florida added helpful comments on the book’s style. Needless to say, I alone bear responsibility for any errors of fact or judgment that may remain in the text.

I would also like to thank Professor Gerald Kleinfeld, editor of
German Studies Review,
for allowing me to republish here portions of my article “From Splinter Party to Mass Movement: The Austrian Nazi Breakthrough” (February 1979, pp. 7-29). Likewise, I am indebted to Professor Douglas Unfug, editor of
Central European History
, for his permission to republish sections of my article entitled “Fascism and the
Fuhrerprinzip
: The Austrian Example” (September 1979, pp. 272-96).

Wava Raffensparger and Laurie Hodge of the UCF interlibrary loan office, devoted many hours to obtaining rare books and microfilm from other institutions. Mrs. Karen Morgan of Oviedo, Florida, along with my two young sons, Mark and Glenn, saved me much tedious labor by typing literally thousands of note cards. Finally, a special debt of gratitude is owed my wife, Marianne, who proofread much of the manuscript and who for years patiently sacrificed countless family excursions so that this project could be brought to completion.

Oviedo, Florida

31 March 1980

ABBREVIATIONS

The following acronymns and abbreviations are used in the notes and, where marked by a single asterisk, also in the text. Two asterisks indicate use in the Bibliography.

AA    Auswartiges Amt; German Foreign Ministry, Berlin

Abw.    Abwehr; Intelligence

AVA    Allgemeines Verwaltungsarchiv;    General    Administrative

Archive, Vienna
A-Z    Arbeiter-Zeitung
, Vienna

BDC    Berlin Document Center

CSP*    Christlichsoziale Partei; Christian Social party of Austria

DAP*    Deutsche Arbeiterpartei; German Workers’ party of Austria

DAP*    Deutsche Arbeiter-Presse
, Vienna

DBFP    Documents on British Foreign Policy, 1919-1939

DGFP    Documents on German Foreign Policy, 1918-1945

DNSAP    Deutsche Nationalsozialistische Arbeiterpartei; German

National Socialist Workers’ party. Name adopted by the Austrian Nazis in May 1918 DOw    Dokumentationsarchiv des osterreichischen

Widerstandesbewegung; Documentation Archive of the Austrian Resistance Movement, Vienna
FRUS    Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States

GVP*    Grossdeutsche Volkspartei; Greater German People’s party of

Austria

HB*    Hitler Bewegung; Hitler Movement (of the Austrian National

Socialist German Workers’ party)

HI, NS-HA Hoover Institution, Stanford University, NSDAP Hauptarchiv; Central Archive of the Nazi party (microfilm collection)

A study of Austrian National Socialism involves many German words for which no commonly accepted English equivalents exist. In such cases the original German form has been used in this book for both the singular and the plural. Except when being defined, singular terms are in Roman letters, e.g.: Gauleiter, Heimwehr, Landesleiter, and Parteigenosse. To distinguish plurals, italics are employed, e.g.:
Gauleiter, Heimwehr
en,
Landesleiter,
and
Parteigenossen.

CHAPTER I CRIPPLED FROM BIRTH: THE FIRST AUSTRIAN REPUBLIC

In the history of European fascism between the two world wars one fact stands out: nowhere did fascists enjoy the majority support of their countrymen before coming to power. Therefore, whatever success the fascists had cannot be understood apart from the weaknesses and divisions of their opponents and the internal problems of the states in which they arose. This fundamental truth is just as valid for the Nazis of Austria as it is for the German Nazis in the Weimar Republic and the Fascists of pre-1922 Italy.

Nazism, and European fascism in general, did not arise in a vacuum. If the new Republic of Austria, which was founded in 1918, had had a long democratic tradition, a prosperous economy, and, perhaps above all, a citizenry with a burning desire for independence, the Nazis, or any other fascist group, would hardly have attracted more than a handful of supporters. But such conditions did not exist in Austria. Although having some democratic elements, the fallen Austrian Empire had been essentially authoritarian. Worse yet, the political parties of postwar Austria regarded each other as enemies rather than as fellow citizens having honest if differing viewpoints.

The division of the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy into a patchwork of Successor States also left the Austrian economy so shattered that it would not recover until after the Second World War. So, far from greeting their new state and constitution with joy and optimism, most Austrians were convinced that their country could survive economically and politically only if joined to its great German neighbor in a so-called Anschluss. It should surprise no one, therefore, that parties arose in Austria demanding the abolition of democracy and the independence of the state.

*

Austria at the Paris Peace Conference

The German-speaking people of the Austrian Empire were undoubtedly the monarchy’s most loyal subjects. Only with considerable misgivings was a republic proclaimed by the German remnant of the Imperial Austrian Parliament on 12 November 1918. Although the new state bore a faint resemblance to the medieval crownlands that belonged to the Habsburgs before 1526, it was in reality a new and, to most of its citizens, an unwelcome creation. For the German-Austrians their state represented not liberation but punishment for losing the war. That the German-Austrians were regarded by the victorious Western powers as a vanquished fragment of the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy was only too apparent from their treatment at the Paris Peace Conference.

The Austrian delegation was housed—or perhaps more accurately, “imprisoned”—in the Chateau of Saint-Germain in the suburbs of Paris. Like other enemy delegations, they were literally locked up, and their correspondence with the outside world was censored.
¹
By the time the Austrians reached the French capital there was little left to decide. Disputed border areas had already been militarily occupied by Austria’s neighbors; and those countries’ territorial claims, for the most part, had already been recognized by the “Big Four” (the United States, Britain, France, and Italy). Lacking the military power of its neighbors, and cut off by them from vitally needed food supplies, Austria prudently asked only for the German-speaking areas of the old monarchy. But even this request was denied.