Polish Colonial Ambitions in the Inter-War Period

Slavic Review ◽  
1967 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 648-656 ◽  
Author(s):  
Taras Hunczak

One of the most interesting political anachronisms of this century was the Polish demand for colonies. The movement developed rapidly in size and intensity in the early 1930s and reached its climax in 1938-39. Ironically, the Poles clamored for colonies at a time when plans were being prepared to turn Poland herself into one of the first colonies of the Third Reich. In pursuing this course of action the Poles fell victim to the spirit of voluntarism, confusing the will to power with the precondition for greatpower status.The origin of the Polish colonial movement may be dated October 1, 1918, when an organization called Polska Bandera (Polish Flag) was founded by a group of twenty-five men for the purpose of popularizing the importance of the sea to Poland’s national interest and encouraging Polish youth to participate in inland and maritime navigation.

Author(s):  
S. Jazavita

he present article analyses the relationship between the Lithuanian Activist Front and the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN) and their activity parallels in order to reach the Lithuanian and the Ukrainian independence in 1941. The research focuses on the attempts of the OUN and the LAF leaders to project the future Lithuanian and Ukrainian states in the 'New Europe' headed by Germany. Reaching for counterbalance against the USSR and the Communist ideology, the LAF and the OUN organizations aimed at taking into consideration the military and political power of Germany, while Škirpa, the leader of the LAF, coordinated his activities with the OUN leaders, Stetsko, Yaryi, and Bandera. Fanatical chiefs of the Third Reich manipulated with the Lithuanians and Ukrainians' feelings of revenge against the Bolsheviks and the will to feel Europeans; however, they involved a part of Lithuanians and Ukrainians to the massacre of Jews rather than allowed to contribute to Wehrmacht fight against the USSR. Important lesson here that Lithuania and Ukraine did not obtain any independence but just became a part of the Third Reich, which controlled the so called 'New Europe' at the time.


2017 ◽  
Vol 39 (1) ◽  
pp. 19-43
Author(s):  
Marek Maciejewski

THE LEADER, THE NATION AND THE RACE. IDEOLOGICAL PREMISES OF THE NAZI CONCEPT OF LAW The subject matter of the article is devoted to discussing the ideological premises of the con­tent, aims, and functions of Nazi law from the perspective of the legal theoreticians and practition­ers of the Third Reich. Firstly, the significance and role of the supreme leader the Führer of the National Socialists and Germany in asingle person, namely Adolf Hitler, is discussed. The legal doctrine of the Nazi state perceived him — just as he did himself — to be the basic source of law and treated his political decisions as such. In fact, these decisions were even thought to stand above the Weimar Constitution of 1919 which was only formally in force and other pieces of legislation. Hitler was not merely viewed as the supreme legislator, but also as the highest judge, acting by the will of the German nation. Judicial decisions in the Third Reich were issued on his behalf. Accord­ing to Nazi lawyers, Hitler as Führer embodied and articulated the will of the German nation, whose needs, interests, and aspirations were considered the purpose behind the functioning of the state and the Reich’s law. Furthermore, the German national community deutsche Volksgemeinaschaft rose to the rank of the near absolute determinant of the law’s form and content. It was, in fact, the reference for one of the important principles of Nazi law, i.e. the common good before personal good Gemeinnutz vor Eigennutz — hence, anegation of the concepts of individualism, including the unchallengeable nature of private property. In addition, the ideological premises of the Nazi concept of law also comprised racial issues. The Third Reich placed particular emphasis on racial purity and hygiene — which referred predominantly to the Germanic race — as acondition for the German national community’s healthy functioning. Nazi law, inter alia, was supposed to serve precisely that end. The legal doctrine in Germany at the time adopted the unequivocal position that the law — together with the administration of justice — should be one of the most important guards of the longevity and purity of the Germanic race sometimes referred to as the Aryan race. This stipulation, which for the most part was consistently implemented, was closely linked to the National Socialists’ almost zoological antisemitism. It was reflected in numerous normative acts by the Third Reich’s authorities targeting the Jewish population in Germany and the countries it occupied during WWII.


Film Studies ◽  
2004 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 75-86 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan Marcus

Leni Riefenstahl was one of filmmakings most contentious directors. The power of her epic documentaries, Triumph of the Will (1935) and Olympia (1938), have cemented her place in film history. More criticism has been written about Riefenstahl than any other director, except perhaps Hitchcock and Welles. Publicity surrounding the publication of an illustrated book marking her centenary reawakened debates about Riefenstahl‘s career in film and her involvement with the Third Reich. In this article, I focus on one of the key films which emerged from that relationship, Triumph of the Will (Triumph des Willens), which I discussed at length in my interview with Riefenstahl. Her recollections were sharp and I was intrigued by some of her answers, not for what new insight they offered, but for how they reaffirmed how she wished others to interpret her films and motivations. In particular, I was interested in the way she considered Triumph of the Will to be a realistic portrayal of the Nazi‘s 1934 Nuremberg Rally and the events surrounding it, and her role as a filmmaker in shaping that representation.


Author(s):  
Steven Michael Press

In recognizing more than just hyperbole in their critical studies of National Socialist language, post-war philologists Viktor Klemperer (1946) and Eugen Seidel (1961) credit persuasive words and syntax with the expansion of Hitler's ideology among the German people. This popular explanation is being revisited by contemporary philologists, however, as new historical argument holds the functioning of the Third Reich to be anything but monolithic. An emerging scholarly consensus on the presence of more chaos than coherence in Nazi discourse suggests a new imperative for research. After reviewing the foundational works of Mein Kampf (1925) and Myth of the Twentieth Century (1930), the author confirms Klemperer and Seidel’s claim for linguistic manipulation in the rise of the National Socialist Party. Most importantly, this article provides a detailed explanation of how party leaders employed rhetorical language to promote fascist ideology without an underlying basis of logical argumentation.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document