logo
Letter From Westphalia, Germany; 6 June 1933

Letter From Westphalia, Germany; 6 June 1933

Scoop7 days ago
Friday, 18 July 2025
On Saturday I came into possession of this letter, transcript below.
I will note that the recipient of the letter is someone I know a bit about; I would like to know more about his time in London, circa 1930-1932. I understand that he attended the London School of Economics. I never met him; but, me being a student of the Great Depression, I wish I had known him while writing my MA thesis.
Eric Salmon lived from 1903 to 1990. Certainly a patrician, he was an Auckland City Councillor and associate of Auckland's 'Mayor Robbie'. He would never have had any sympathy with the Nazi cause. Nevertheless, I would like to think that, like me, he would have had some empathy for the German people in 1933; and the many other people then caught up in events – indeed zeitgeists – moving too fast, and on too great a scale.
Sadly, I will never be able to see Mr Salmon's letter to his German contact (probably written late in 1932). I do not know if he replied to the letter below:
________________________________________________________________________________
Home Address:
Schwelm (in Westfalen)
Kirkplatz 7
Schwelm, 6th VI. [June] 1933
Dear Mr. Salmon,
Your letter with the interesting account of your native [town?] and the economic position of New Zealand was a great joy to me, and I thank you very much for it. I hope, you won't take it amiss that my answer comes so late. During the last months I spent all my time in finishing the dissertation for my doctor examination. Some days ago I finally handed it to my professor, and I am now preparing for the oral examination which will take place in the end of July. – How are you getting on with your work?
In the course of rather a short time the political situation in this country has thoroughly changed, and the questions you put to me in your letter have found a sudden solution. I may add : also a good one. You are perhaps astonished to read that, for – as far as I know – most of the great newspapers of the world tell you just the contrary. The reason for it is that the European nations, above all France and Polonia [Poland], but England too, fear a new war, and this fear is in an inexcusable way nourished by all those German people who don't agree with the new spirit and the new methods. The Jewish question is also of great importance. The measures we took against the Jews were not at all cruel or unjustified, as you read in English papers. All we try is only to reduce the enormous influence and power of the Jews in Germany to an extent which compounds to their small number. More and more their influence has become a destructive force in our national life. What you see nowadays in Germany is not a warlike or an extremely militaristic spirit or a mass barbarism (as many foreigners suppose), but the will to build a new nation, in which no longer the unchecked liberalism of the postwar years reigns. We were standing just before a complete breakdown and the chaos of Communism, which would have been fatal for the whole world. In this dangerous moment came the revolution of our nationalist party under the great leader Hitler. It marks the beginning of something quite new in Germany. We know that a great many tasks are waiting for us, but seeing them we are no longer desperate as it was the case in the last years. The new Germany has a new hope, a new will, and a new energy, and with them we shall overcome all problems and difficulties.
What do you think about the change in Germany, and what do you read in the papers? I should be very glad to hear something about it from you. Hoping you are quite well I am with kindest regards, yours Theodor Hort.
________________________________________________________________________________
My Comments:
Herr Hort – presumably Dr Hort, soon after – is writing from Schwelm, eleven kilometres east of the Westphalian city of Wuppertal. To the west of Wuppertal is Düsseldorf, on the Rhine; Cologne is to the south, near where the river Wupper flows into the Rhine. To the north of Wuppertal is the Ruhr Valley, Germany's western industrial heartland. Between Düsseldorf and Wuppertal is Neandertal/Neanderthal. Most of the journey between Wuppertal and Schwelm can be taken on the 'world-famous in Westphalia' Wuppertal Schwebebahn, the suspension railway, built between 1897 and 1903, which runs above the Wupper River. I am privileged to have ridden on that railway in 1984.
I had hoped that, because the railway is still there, that Wuppertal had not been bombed by the RAF during WW2. No such luck. I found this article in the Burnie Advocate (Tasmania), 1 June 1943: Wuppertal raid one of heaviest of war. This was eight weeks before Operation Gomorrah decimated Hamburg. (On Wuppertal, refer also: Planning a Bombing Operation: Wuppertal 1943, My grandfather, the bomber pilot, When the singing stops on Christmas Eve, German tragedy of destiny, Wikipedia.)
I have no idea what Theodor Hort's fate was. Maybe he was recruited for the notorious Einsatzgruppen, which was top-heavy with academic doctors? More likely he turned away, at least in his mind, from the excesses of the New Germany; nevertheless serving his country in some capacity, albeit out of the kind of obligation that would have been hard to refuse. There is a high chance he died during the war. I'm guessing he would have been about 35 years old in 1943.
Throughout the twentieth century, many young Australians and New Zealanders studied at the London School of Economics. (William Pember Reeves was its Director from 1908 to 1919.) So did many upper-middle-class Germans; Herr Hort clearly fell into that class-category. Other Germans to study economics at the LSE included Heinrich Brüning and Ursula von der Leyen.
Brüning was Chancellor of Germany from mid-1930 to mid-1932. Brüning was the centrist politician most associated with the economic collapse of Weimar Germany during the Great Depression, thanks to his 'liberal' policies of stubborn fiscal conservatism. He sought to balance the Budget at any cost. Germany and the world paid a very high cost indeed. I understand that the "unchecked liberalism" Hort refers to is the economic liberalism of Brüning and others (think today's neoliberalism), and not so much the social liberalism of Berlin that was an icon of 1920s' Germany. (As a part of that social liberalism, Germany in 1918 – Germany's first annus horribilis last century – became a proper democracy, with proportional representation, and votes for women.)
I would imagine that Hort's parents would have voted for Bruning's Zentrum (Centre) party. While it started as a Catholic party, it was actually the foundation party of German 'Christian Democracy', having already broadened its base by 1930. Westphalia, Düsseldorf and Cologne represented the West German heartland of centrist Christian Democratic politics. And consistently these places cast the fewest votes for Adolf Hitler's party. (The city of Cologne, the least-Nazi-supporting city in Germany, was the first large German urban centre to be carpet-bombed by the British, in 1942.)
Nevertheless, at least in March 1933, young Theodor probably voted for the National Socialists. (Although his "great leader" epithet was probably a direct translation of 'führer' rather than an expression of devotion.) The Enabling Act of 1933, which ended democracy in Germany, had been in force for three months before Herr Hort wrote this letter. He, like many others in a desperate country, was willing to forego democracy if other goals might better be achieved without it. Further, by 1938, Hitlernomics – borrowing 'as much as it takes' to re-arm and reorganise along Spartan lines – was looking like a great success. (Something suspiciously similar took place in the Bundestag in 2025, exactly 92 years after the Enabling Act, using the outvoted 'lame-duck' parliament to get the necessary two-thirds majority. This time it was the 'fascists' – AFD – who were against borrowing to re-arm; and the outvoted fastidiously-anti-borrowing neoliberal FDP, who should not have been there.)
Finally, here, we should note that Germany as a whole – and certainly western Germany – while Judeophobic, was probably not much more Judeophobic than other European countries (including the USA); and that most German Jews, to 1918 at least, had seen themselves as more Germans than Semites, and played a significant role in the German armed forces in World War One. The circumstances of 1918, however, made it a relatively easy task for would-be-politicians with nationalist agendas to scapegoat Jews. There were vastly more Jews living in the countries east of Germany, and they from 1940 to 1944 ended up being very much in the wrong place at the wrong time. In Germany in 1933, 'Jewish' identity was used very much as proxies for the twin-devils who many Germans believed had 'stabbed Germany in the back' in 1918 (at a time when Germany appeared to be winning on the western front) and again in (and around) 1931; 'Bolshevik' Communists and big-finance capitalists. The 1918 claim of a 'stolen war' was an evidentially-false conspiracy theory which had the appearance of credibility to many desperate people looking for simple answers, and scapegoats.
On the Bolshevik matter, while Theodor Hort and others will not have known about it until much later – the winter of 1932/33 was the peak of the Holodomor where four million mainly-Ukrainians were deliberately starved to death by Josef Stalin's Moscow-based regime. Too many elements of the western press were looking the other way. Soviet Communism was being romanticised in certain middle-class and working-class circles in 'the West' (though demonised in others: refer Three Women who Launched a Movement); the mega-atrocities were downplayed by mainstream journalists such as Walter Duranty.
It was the full discovery in 1939 of the Holodomor and the later Great Purge (s) that enabled the Nazis to contemplate an even worse genocide, a substantial part of which became the Shoah. The Shoah, while the worst genocide in the last 100 years (at least outside of Mao's China), was neither the first nor the last real-world example of 'hunger games'.
-------------
Keith Rankin (keith at rankin dot nz), trained as an economic historian, is a retired lecturer in Economics and Statistics. He lives in Auckland, New Zealand.
Keith Rankin
Political Economist, Scoop Columnist
Keith Rankin taught economics at Unitec in Mt Albert since 1999. An economic historian by training, his research has included an analysis of labour supply in the Great Depression of the 1930s, and has included estimates of New Zealand's GNP going back to the 1850s.
Keith believes that many of the economic issues that beguile us cannot be understood by relying on the orthodox interpretations of our social science disciplines. Keith favours a critical approach that emphasises new perspectives rather than simply opposing those practices and policies that we don't like.
Keith retired in 2020 and lives with his family in Glen Eden, Auckland.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

‘He really miscalculated the reaction' - new curbs on anti-corruption watchdogs have alarmed Ukrainians
‘He really miscalculated the reaction' - new curbs on anti-corruption watchdogs have alarmed Ukrainians

NZ Herald

time2 hours ago

  • NZ Herald

‘He really miscalculated the reaction' - new curbs on anti-corruption watchdogs have alarmed Ukrainians

The protesters arrived with their children and dogs, on prosthetic legs and in wheelchairs, carrying blue-and-yellow Ukrainian flags and shouting for the Government to revoke the law, which has stoked immense public outrage, alarmed former officials and raised consternation among Ukraine's European allies who are becoming the country's main lifeline for weapons and economic aid amid uncertain support from the United States. A woman stands wrapped in a Ukrainian flag during Wednesday's protests. Photo / Ed Ram, for the Washington Post 'This is how democracy should look,' said Anton Avrynskyi, 41, a tech entrepreneur who joined the crowds with his wife, Vitaliia, and their 9-year-old son, Ivan. During wartime, the country must stay united behind the president, he said - but should also not fear correcting his mistakes. 'We are here to help him not make wrong decisions,' Avrynskyi said. The law has put a spotlight on Ukraine's history of endemic corruption, which has long been used by the country's detractors to criticise it. It could also affect Ukraine's candidacy to join the European Union. As crowds gathered for a second night in a row, Zelenskyy showed signs of imminent backtracking. The President said he had 'heard what people are saying these days' and would propose 'a plan of concrete steps that could strengthen the rule of law in Ukraine'. He suggested a draft law that would ensure the independence of all of the country's anti-corruption institutions. The masses appeared unsatisfied with his response, and many said they were appalled by how quickly the Government rammed through the law without assessing public opinion, which some saw as a signal it was veering towards unchecked autocracy. Mariia Golota, 35, who is nearly nine months pregnant, carried a sign that read 'I want to give birth in a fair Ukraine'. 'We choose to live here and if you live here you have to fight for fair laws and transparency,' Golota said. The law seemed to be rushed through parliament so 'that maybe no one will notice', said her husband, Danylo Golota, who serves in Ukraine's Third Assault Brigade. 'Most people are ready to stand up and go protest and fight. We lost too much so we are not ready to just swallow something we don't like.' The demonstrators gathered in front of a theatre on Ivan Franko Square, near the presidential administration, in far greater numbers than the estimated 2000 people who protested on Wednesday, shouting, 'Shame!' The presidential headquarters now sit behind several checkpoints and are surrounded by small mountains of sandbags to protect against Russian airstrikes. The crowds sang the national anthem, chanted 'Glory to Ukraine's Armed Forces' and resurrected popular chants from revolutions past, including 'Together we are many - we cannot be defeated!' Some young people climbed onto the theatre's balconies, waving Ukrainian flags and leading the cheers. Others perched on fountains and statues or put out lawn chairs and picnic blankets. Oleh, 39, a Ukrainian soldier, lost his left leg in battle late last year. He said he joined the crowds because he fears the law will risk Ukraine's future in the European Union - the same future he fought for in the country's east until he stepped on a Russian antipersonnel mine near the city of Toretsk. 'It's just offensive even as a civilian,' Oleh said. 'From a military standpoint, it's also offensive that those boys are standing there fighting, and in-house this is what's happening.' Barbara Varvara, 18, walked with her dog, Manya, who was put up for adoption after she was wounded in the eastern Donetsk region several months ago. A sign around Manya's neck read: 'Soon, even dogs won't want to live here'. 'We have so much corruption in our country and we can't do anything,' Varvara said. 'I'm here to show we are against that.' The law, which was adopted by the parliament and signed by Zelenskyy, places Nabu and Sapo under the control of the general prosecutor's office, which critics say effectively abolishes their independence. The two institutions were the main anti-corruption bodies created as part of an aggressive campaign against public graft and other malfeasance since Ukraine's 2014 Maidan Revolution, when hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians took to the streets in part because they were fed up with rampant corruption under President Viktor Yanukovych. The two bodies functioned free of outside control. Yesterday, Zelenskyy, who had tried to frame the law as a way of strengthening the anti-corruption effort, met the heads of the country's law enforcement and anti-corruption bodies, including Nabu and Sapo. After the meeting, however, Nabu and Sapo issued a joint statement, saying that the 'legislative changes adopted yesterday significantly limit' their independence. 'To restore full and independent work, clear and unambiguous steps are needed at the legislative level to restore the guarantees that were abolished by parliament,' the statement said. Kyiv Mayor Vitali Klitschko, who attended the first protest on Wednesday, posted on social media that those responsible for the law were 'dragging Ukraine faster into authoritarianism'. Ukrainian lawmakers who voted against the bill said Zelenskyy severely underestimated both the domestic and international reaction to the move, which is seen as an effort to rein in officials tasked with independently investigating corruption cases - including those that may reach close to the President's inner circle. The move appeared to reflect Zelenskyy's growing distance from the generation that ushered in a new democratic era after the 2014 revolution - many of whom are now among those fighting on the front lines for the same democratic values they championed on the streets more than a decade ago. 'The scariest thing is that it will be used by our foes,' said Ivanna Klympush-Tsintsadze, a lawmaker from Ukraine's European Solidarity Party, who fears outsiders will use the debacle to try to paint Ukraine as a nation that remains mired in corruption. Klympush-Tsintsadze, who worked extensively on Ukraine's bid to join the EU, voted against the law. Protesters gather on a road leading to the Ukrainian president's office. Photo / Ed Ram, for the Washington Post Russia, which has long amplified the narrative of corruption in Ukraine, was quick to leap on the development, with Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov saying yesterday that American and European tax dollars have 'been plundered'. Russia has long been criticized by the West for having one of the world's worst records on corruption. Zelenskyy's signing of the law tested the unwritten agreement between Ukrainian society and government that there will not be a political uprising during wartime because of the shared understanding that Russia is the enemy, said Volodymyr Ariev, a lawmaker who belongs to the same party as Klympush-Tsintsadze. 'He really miscalculated the reaction of the society,' he said of Zelenskyy. 'We are fighting against Russia not only as a country but as a model.' European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen called Zelenskyy to convey 'her strong concerns about the consequences of the amendments' and 'requested the Ukrainian Government for explanations', a spokesperson for the European Commission said. 'The respect for the rule of law and the fight against corruption are core elements of the European Union,' the spokesperson said. 'As a candidate country, Ukraine is expected to uphold these standards fully. There cannot be a compromise.' On Tuesday, agents from Ukraine's security service, the SBU, the general prosecutor's office, and the State Bureau of Investigation raided Nabu offices, claiming the existence of a 'Russian 'mole' in one of the bureau's elite units,' SBU head Vasyl Maliuk said. Many Ukrainians flatly rejected the Government's justifications for the law, however. The move against the agencies also comes a month after Nabu opened a criminal case against Deputy Prime Minister Oleksiy Chernyshov on charges of 'abuse of office and receiving undue benefits in substantial amounts for himself and third parties'. It was one of the highest-level corruption cases since Zelenskyy became president six years ago, targeting one of the closest allies of his powerful chief of staff, Andriy Yermak. Chernyshov denied the charges, but he lost his position in last week's government reshuffle.

EU backs potential counter-tariffs on 93 billion euros of US goods
EU backs potential counter-tariffs on 93 billion euros of US goods

RNZ News

time8 hours ago

  • RNZ News

EU backs potential counter-tariffs on 93 billion euros of US goods

The European Commission says its primary focus is to achieve a negotiated outcome to avert 30 percent US tariffs that US President Donald Trump has said he will apply on 1 August. Photo: AFP The European Union's member countries have voted to approve counter-tariffs on 93 billion euros (US$109b) of US goods, which could be imposed should the bloc fail to reach a trade deal with Washington, EU diplomats say. The 27-nation bloc's executive European Commission had said on Wednesday (local time) its primary focus was to achieve a negotiated outcome with Washington to avert 30 percent US tariffs that US President Donald Trump has said he will apply on 1 August. The commission said it would press on in parallel with plans for potential countermeasures, merging two packages of proposed tariffs of 21b euros and 72b euros into a single list and submitting this to EU members for approval. No countermeasures would enter force until 7 August. So far the EU has held back from imposing any countermeasures, despite Trump's repeated announcements of tariffs, the broadest of which have been postponed. EU member states authorised the first package of countermeasures in April, but these were immediately suspended to allow time for negotiations. The EU and United States appear to be heading towards a possible trade deal, according to EU diplomats, which would result in a broad 15 percent tariff on EU goods imported into the US, mirroring a framework agreement Washington struck with Japan. Trump would still need to take any final decision. Under the outlines of the potential deal, the 15 percent rate could apply to sectors including cars and pharmaceuticals and would not be added to long-standing US duties, which average just under 5 percent. There could also be concessions for sectors such as aircraft, lumber as well as some medicines and agricultural products, which would not face tariffs, diplomats said. Washington does not, however, appear willing to lower its 50 percent tariff on steel. - Reuters

'I'm so very sorry this cost has been put upon you'
'I'm so very sorry this cost has been put upon you'

Otago Daily Times

time18 hours ago

  • Otago Daily Times

'I'm so very sorry this cost has been put upon you'

By Monique Steele of RNZ The agriculture minister has apologised to New Zealand's top beef exporters for extra costs they will likely face due to new anti-deforestation rules for European Union imports. Those sending agricultural products - like beef, leather or logs in New Zealand's case - will have to prove that their products have not come from land that was recently deforested. Despite fierce opposition from New Zealand industry groups and government officials, the European Union Deforestation Regulation (EUDR) appeared to be going ahead. From the end of the year, all exporters to the EU will be required to prove land used for forests has not been cut down for animals to graze on since 2020. The regulation was amended to exclude sheep products in 2022 and its implementation was delayed last year. But the beef, meat and wood processing sectors were preparing for the new incoming requirements. It was announced this week that the Meat Industry Association, Beef and Lamb New Zealand and an analytics firm were developing aerial and satellite-generated farm maps, in addition to compiling the movement of livestock. The New Zealand Deforestation Map initiative was to help the sector prepare the documents and data needed with each shipment of their products going to the EU from 31 December. The regulation was expected to affect $213 million in beef and leather exports to the EU and $100m of New Zealand wood products. Minister 'banging on the table' for exemption Minister for Agriculture, Forestry and Trade and Investment Todd McClay told the red meat sector conference in Ōtautahi/Christchurch on Tuesday that companies should get prepared for the incoming new rules. "Well done for preparing. I'm so very sorry this cost has been put upon you, because in my view it is unnecessary," he said. "Since we came to government, I have consistently said to the European Union we have standards, the equivalent to yours if not higher, so you should not be putting costs upon every single producer in New Zealand, and we have been looking for ways to find exemptions or to changes, or to get the cost down." McClay wrote to the European Commission last year, and said he met the European Commissioner in Brussels last month who suggested other countries were also trying for exemptions, like France. "You'd figure when the EU member states don't like something, perhaps there's a change coming," he said. But he said New Zealand already had native forest protection rules that resulted in penalties or prosecutions for offending. "They have nothing to worry about in New Zealand. You're not allowed to deforest native forests in New Zealand. "Ultimately I as the government can give an absolute assurance that it doesn't happen because we prosecute, we go and find these things." He said it will likely impose "unreasonable" costs on producers, making it a barrier to trade, even while there was a free trade agreement with the EU now in force. "So you need to keep preparing in case they don't get there, but we're gonna keep banging the table." Mapping farms and tracking livestock Industry analytics firm Prism Earth was a partnership between Silver Fern Farms and Lynker Analytics launched to meet the increased demand for carbon traceability, its website said. Prism Earth was now using satellite imagery, aerial photography, LiDAR and artificial intelligence to map farms and identify grazing areas, forests and track animals via the National Animal Identification and Tracing (NAIT) programme. Also speaking at the red meat industry event, managing director Matt Lythe said the challenge was to accurately understand the conversion of land and animal movements. "Every consignment will need to have a due diligence statement that essentially monitors every NAIT tag, every animal and its passage through the New Zealand landscape and the grazing process through all its dimensions, and whether it's past deforested land or not," he said. "There are some record-keeping requirements that need to be held in place for five years, so it's a reasonably onerous obligation on us all to achieve." Lythe said its modelling showed there were just under 14,000 hectares of beef production farmland to October 2024 where forests had been removed, and 1600 "affected NAIT" farms. "So headline number, just under 14,000 hectares have had forest removal," he told the conference. The main types of removal were pine rotation, followed by woodlots then shelterbelts. The modelling showed 32 hectares of indigenous forest were removed, affecting 24 farms. "I've highlighted the indigenous loss as really the key critical area that we're focusing on," he said. "Thirty-two hectares of indigenous forest in New Zealand has been removed that breaches that European rule." Owners of farms deemed to have been deforested would need to demonstrate to Prism that the removal of trees was not to convert land for agricultural use. Lythe said farmers could mitigate the risk of cattle crossing into deforested land through fencing or other controls, and demonstrate that the removal of trees was due to either animal welfare, erosion control, health and safety or conservation and biodiversity protection. The New Zealand Deforestation Map would be updated before December, and updated every year. The Meat Industry Association was then expected to engage with the wider sector.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store