Hans Blüher

Hans Blüher

Hans Blüher (born  February 17, 1888 in Freiburg in Silesia , †  February 4, 1955 in Berlin ) was a German writer and philosopher .

As an early member and “first historian” of the Wandervogel movement , he achieved great fame at a young age. His rebellion against traditional institutions of school and church, accompanied by breaking taboos , helped him . Sometimes received with interest, sometimes perceived as scandalous and opposed to his comments on homosexual aspects in the Wandervogel business, which Blüher soon expanded into a theory of male society.

In the transition phase from the Empire to the Weimar democracy, atheist and at times socialist- oriented, Blüher developed into a Protestant , anti-Semite , anti- feminist and supporter of the monarchy in the years after the First World War , who in 1928 also had the opportunity to meet the former Kaiser Wilhelm II in exile in Holland . According to his own statements, Blüher turned away from National Socialism after the SA leader Ernst Röhm was murdered on Hitler's orders in 1934 (" Röhm Putsch ").

Since 1924 Blüher, who married a doctor and had two children with her, lived as a freelance writer and treating psychologist in Berlin-Hermsdorf . Here, after retiring from public life during the Nazi era, he worked on his major philosophical work The Axis of Nature , published in 1949 .

Student at the humanistic high school in Steglitz

In 1896 Blüher's father, the pharmacist Hermann Blüher, and his wife Helene left the Silesian Freiburg with the eight-year-old Hans and first moved to Halle and in 1898 to Steglitz , where the ten-year-old was sent to the local grammar school. In his first accounting for this school time, submitted in 1912, Blüher wrote:

“The spiritual joys are the purest and most perfect, they remain undiminished throughout life and constantly trigger new feelings of happiness. One should now expect that an institute like the school, which is only concerned with spiritual things, and in the freshest time of life, would have to generate a frenzy of joy in discovery and understanding: - And it generates precisely the opposite! She works not only with occasional overexertion and difficulties, which of course cannot be avoided even in the most free intellectual work, but with a very immense excess of discomfort. And this is expected of an age that is least suitable because of its tenderness and need for joy. There is indeed a burden on these young shoulders that the man only thinks back to with horror and that continues to come alive in his dreams. [...]
The 'science' taught in school and the entire conception of culture that is represented there is not a free one, but a completely applied one. It is in the service of all possible ideals and other prejudices; Patriotism and religion, in order to find solid ground in the hearts of students, require a considerable coloring and falsification of reality. [...] Where should spiritual joy come from when the student is out of tune with the instrument on which he could play it ...? "

Later on, Blüher was sometimes much more mild and grateful. School director Robert Lück , whom Blüher had described as a somewhat narrow-minded Christian educator in 1912, was upgraded in the second version of Blüher's autobiographical account "Werke und Tage". Blüher praised Lück's life's work and described the selection of the teaching staff as masterful: “How he actually managed it is a mystery to everyone. He had an obvious charisma here. The college almost resembled an order. "

In his review of life, Blüher placed his former school in line with those grammar schools to which he recognized an outstanding role in German cultural life. Nowhere else in Germany has the ground been so fertile for the conflict between the humanistic educational power and the romantic counter-movement; the Wandervogel and the youth movement could only have come into being here.

A special kind of hiking bird

Hans Blüher became the 33rd member of the Wandervogel in 1902. It was a solemn procedure that Karl Fischer held for each of the newly arriving "foxes". After an instruction about the goals and thoughts of the Wandervogel movement, the aspirant was sworn to remain loyal to the Oberbachanten fisherman and his Bachanten and boys and, where necessary, to obey. If he promised this in the presence of at least two other witnesses who authenticated the promise, Fischer entered the name in the Scholar book.

Hans Blüher understood this community as a protest movement against the “weathered ideals” of the “old generation”, which one had to vigorously resist through one's own views and experiences. Blüher took a strictly negative attitude towards all pedagogical tendencies aimed at comfortable hiking. For him, stipulations that the search for accommodation had to take place early out of consideration for younger participants only showed “a lack of understanding of the great horror that the forest and the night create in the minds of the elderly as well.” It was a soft neglect of the young Personality in "breaking the power of such precious hours". Blüher also didn't think much of recommendations to break off the hike before reaching the destination in case of persistent rain in order not to impair clothing and mood in the long term: “All of this is indeed recommended for the faint of heart who have to tell themselves from the outset that they are not have the strength to drown out the rigors of the weather with the exuberance of their youthfulness, and whoever knows the old Wandervogelbach antiquity and is not a degenerate also knows the unforgettable splendor of such desperate rainy weather marches. "

Together with Walter Benjamin , Ernst Joëll , Fritz Klatt , the brothers Hans and Walter Koch, Hans Kollwitz , Erich Krems , Alfred Kurella and Alexander Rustow , he belonged to the so-called Westender Circle , which brought together the left wing of the bourgeois youth movement . Klatt was probably the intellectual and journalistic engine of this union.

Steglitzer with a special elite awareness

In hymnic words, Blüher looked back in his sixth decade on those regions of the Mark, in which the Steglitz wandering birds sought and found their weekend experiences in nature. This landscape, inconspicuous compared to southern Germany, wanted to be discovered “with all the glow and flexibility of our heart: this landscape had to be conquered, its divine word had to come to us, otherwise we youth would have perished on the impure breath of our father's culture. [...] The Nuthetal , on which the first fires of the youth movement burned, had soaked us with the historical power that had been in it for centuries and had taken us to itself. We descended from its hills and were a stand. "

In the Steglitz society, these unusual formations of young people formed a very peculiar contrast to the rest of the citizens when they returned home after an extensive hike:

“Everything was now alive in Steglitz. The clean boys of the well-fed citizens went for a walk in new suits on Albrechtstrasse, following the little girls. The Fichteberg aristocracy and the half-nobility had just left the church behind them and they strutted home with glazed eyes close to God. Whenever her sons took off their brightly colored student hats, they only ever touched the umbrella with two fingers, because the other three had to hold the neat pair of gloves. One greeted and honored a lot. - And in between these wild figures, this colorful mix of great schoolboys! They stepped on the soft pavement with their bulky boots; One of them held on behind, for Wolf had thrown him down the sandy slope of the Havelberg, and his trousers had burst deep. [...] 'The crazy fisherman!' you just said and went on. "

Hans Blüher, whose distinctive, gaunt appearance earned him the name “Gestalt”, developed into one of the most loyal followers of Fischer, but also had a lot of support from Fischer in his life as a wanderer. From a summer trip to the Rhine in 1903, Blüher was sent home by the chief scientist Siegfried Copalle for lack of classification, which Fischer did not approve of. This also subsequently stood protectively in front of him.

The wealthy manor owner Wilhelm (Willie) Jansen, whom Blüher, now a chief scientist himself, got to know with his group during a summer trip from the Rhön to Lake Constance in 1905 and won over to the Wandervogel movement, also made an extremely lasting impression on Hans Blüher . He wrote about Jansen's effect:

“Jansen enchants young people with his character, in no time he has opened up the West German schools for the Wandervogel, and the young people cling to him like burrs. It was of course nothing else than that with Fischer back then: hero love. But here undoubtedly in an increased form. […] Believe it or not, I have read it in numerous letters and heard it myself from numerous young people; it was real eroticism that broke out here. "

Like Karl Fischer before, Wilhelm Jansen became the idealized youth leader who came to his authority through charisma and talent and not through paragraphs or power - as the teachers were accused of. The element of voluntariness gave the model of the youth leader an unexpected dynamic, which was mostly described as romantic and enthusiastic to fascinating and eerie. The self-education of young people also made it possible to break away from the traditions of the parents' generation, which were experienced as outmoded, and to try out their own ways of growing up. At least for Blüher, Jansen became the style-forming personality of the youth movement:

“Jansen was one of the first to want to use ancient gymnastics instead of the barbaric and often tasteless German gymnastics, because this most natural type of physical culture had only been eliminated by Christian culture and gymnastics was a highly imperfect substitute for it. The first German palaestra in Charlottenburg near Berlin had been built by Jansen, one of the first light and air baths stood on his estate, and his capital worked wherever prudish and concealment had to be overcome and, in their place, noble To revive the openness of the naked. The physical culture movement, which is progressing more and more today, is thanks to Jansen for its first successes. "

The motif of the naked body, perceived as original and true, is not only found in the youth movement, but also in other forms of life-reforming groups and ideas. Here, as there, the reference was primarily made to the nudity of ancient cultures , idealized as noble and true .

Historian of the movement

Hans Blüher, who graduated from high school in 1907, spent seven years in the Wandervogel movement before retiring in 1909. But even after that, the connection did not break, especially since Blüher stood by his early friendships even during the process of splitting up the organization and claimed sovereignty over the development of the movement, which he said was encouraged and supported by Willie Jansen, who is also said to have urged him To anticipate the development of the Wandervogel from another side by means of an own work.

In the title, the twenty-four year old in 1912, the year of publication, claimed to capture the rise, flowering and decline of the movement and make them understandable. In doing so, it was important to him, he wrote in the foreword, to tie the apparently unlinked together and to find what is moving in the movements. In contrast to the mere chronicler, every historian must face this subjective side of his work.

"In doing so, he can make major, significant errors, perhaps decisive ones, while the chronicler, in the best of cases, makes a typo [...]. I have to describe the history of the youth movement, the innermost nature of which, as far as I understand it, contains such a wealth of interesting facts that it is well worth considering; a movement that was born out of our youth itself and is probably the strangest that has ever crossed German soil. But it is only the inside that is strange, what has not been said or kept secret. […] It was a youth who ate at clean tables on weekdays and who couldn't look at anything, who then painted on foggy festivals through brown heaths and sandy landscapes in wild clothes, packed and disheveled, unrecognizable, those at night There was fire and talked to one another about things that were never said, full of anger, sulleness, exuberance and sadness. "

Blüher interpreted the institutional beginning of the Wandervogel movement as an “ingenious trick” by Karl Fischer against school laws and state authorities, which forbade students to have their own associations. By winning a number of respected citizens of Steglitz to the board of the “Committee for School Trips”, he was able to put his foundation on a permanent foundation and at the same time created the template for further initiatives: “This committee was the actual association, it was presented to the school, and the names of the men guaranteed that everything was right. The actual youth movement with its leaders existed quite separately from this; It was ensured that the committee had as little as possible to do with it, only gave away money and names and, as I said, 'vouched' for the public. The students themselves were entered in the "Scholar Book", but were not members of the association, but were only on a list where you could find their addresses. "

Fischer and some of his loyal followers came to the founding meeting, including the apprentice mechanic Wolf Meyen, who came up with the brilliant idea as the youngest while searching for a club title, as Blüher reports:

“'If the child just has to have a name, said Wolf Meyen, why shouldn't it be called' Wandervogel '!" That was it: the word was out of the question! Tens of thousands of young people should be enthusiastic about it and find the meaning of their youth in it. "

Meyen had the grave of Kaethe Branco nee in the Berlin-Dahlem cemetery. Helmholtz (1850–1877) and his inscription: “Who gave you migratory birds science […]”.

The association was founded in early November 1901; Fischer used the following winter months to recruit further suitable comrades-in-arms who he could use for management tasks in the next hiking season.

“But when spring began to come, he got in touch with some of the school principals who made their auditorium available to him, and here he went openly in front of the assembled youth and talked to them about hiking and the glory of gypsy life ; but he spoke in cautious words. And it didn't take long before around a hundred Berlin students came together from all the suburbs, enticed by the romantic magic that Fischer and even more of his Bachanten spread around them. "

At first, Blüher took a smug and negative attitude towards ideas that were proposed to the Wandervogel in the course of an “educationalization”. So he polemicized against the "common patriotic and middle-class" ideals of the fathers, "as you get to read them in the newspaper and what a candidate for a government office has to be very generous with in order to be certain of a good career." They are unsurpassable for advertising:

“You saw them posted on all of the Wandervogels' pamphlets and newspapers, ministries and school authorities flocked to their call, along with a whole host of protectoral powers, and each took its toll on the youth movement, which was getting poorer and poorer. At national meetings, young students screamed their throats sore and exuberantly praised the high patriotic and moral importance of the wandering bird, and woe to anyone who dared to have a more naive view: he was an ordinary fellow who understood nothing about them great thoughts of mankind. "

Ultimately, for Blüher, “a time dawned in the history of the wandering bird that bore the stamp of modernity”:

"The great abstinence movement is to be mentioned above all, this decisive plan of civilized humanity, which has the courage to break with every age culture; Furthermore, as a contrast to the mendacious gender segregation practiced by parents, a greater rapprochement of the sexes in youth: girls' migration. In addition, there was the maintenance of the folk song and many other things. […] These parts of the movement were spiritually higher and also resulted in readable newspaper literature, while the only romantics never got very far in this. "

The inclusion of girls in the Wandervogel was strictly forbidden under Karl Fischer, as it was feared that the gender images, presented as polar, would be softened: a feminization of the boys and a 'Verbubung' of the girls. The boys' spirit and nature were exclusively assigned classic male attributes such as toughness, thirst for adventure, discipline, boldness, determination and physical strength. In the bond with a male leader, it was important to develop one's own masculinity, not only by setting them apart from women and girls, but also from the biological fathers who turned out to be useful role models. The Wandervogel thus confirmed the prevailing social gender roles and practices at the time, which excluded boys and girls from being together without adult supervision.

Time critic and taboo breaker: Boy love

It was not uncommon for Blüher to adopt an ironic or polemical tone in his Wandervogel story, where he found the movement alienated from its origins or enriched with the values ​​of "the old generation". He reacted allergically. B. to the appeals of older officers who assigned the Wandervogel national duties and tasks. On the other hand, it was important for him to “bring up enough laughter that can form the only effective counterbalance for that war club patriotism.” As a sign of inner maturity, he recorded “the natural respect for the love of other peoples for their fatherlands”. In 1912, the personification and idolatry of the fatherland, for example through Germania statues, seemed laughable to him, and he considered the pledge of "loyalty to death" combined with "the systematic slaughter of other peoples" to be fatal:

“So there are two powers that constantly incite genocide: certain right-wing political party groups, the so-called 'agitators', and walking hand in hand with them - the schoolmasters, especially the dangerous type of history teacher (sometimes religious teachers). These are people who are so backward that they don't even know that the war between civilized peoples has long since proven to be an unprofitable business, from which even the victor cannot reap much more than his economic ruin and possibly an invasion of Semi-cultural peoples. "

Neither the patriotic impulses nor a mere recreational purpose - away from the "book dust" to restore the willingness to learn - were decisive motives for the migrant bird movement for Blüher, but rather an instinctual desire in the majority of the movement to turn away from the culture of the fathers in the romantic return to nature: "A deep moral corruption, an almost unspeakable mendacity in almost every serious relationship must prevail wherever the youth are prepared for a thought, instead of themselves and real circumstances."

Blüher's most lasting violation of the code of values ​​and taboo laws of the father generation was his commitment to male homoeroticism and its influence on the migratory bird movement. He had been informed about the phenomenon itself in classical school lessons. Then Ion was treated by Chios with a passage in which Sophocles kisses a boy serving him at the banquet and falls in love with him: “The pupils now had to translate this passage and thus got to know a side of ancient life that was otherwise deliberately kept secret from them has been. They shook their heads and now knew a lot more. In his memoirs, Blüher describes the Steglitz high school as a place where homoerotic relationships were very common among boys:

“But I am not aware of a single case where such a boyish love would have led to lascivious attacks. It was just a matter of good form with us not to touch boys before they reached maturity. […] By contrast, erotic relationships were decidedly livelier among their peers; here the fully inflamed Eros grabbed us and tore us away through all the darkness. "

According to Hergemöller, Blüher himself is said to have attracted attention during these years through a series of homoerotic escapades. As Blüher testifies, a journeyman locksmith who fell in love with him also killed himself because of him. Ulfried Geuter, who also evaluated Blüher's private estate for his study, confirms his heterosexual orientation and quotes from a letter from Blüher's parents to his parents, "that it was only a question of power and chance that made the difference in this direction" because he had had "bad luck in the opposite direction" for years, which led to their falling asleep. Louise, on the other hand, his beloved, had for three and a half years had an effect on him that was hardly passionate, but was steady and strong.

The issue of homosexuality assumed general importance for the Wandervogel movement when Willie Jansen, meanwhile Federal Chairman of the Wandervogel in Berlin, denied the allegations against himself of illegal acts in a board meeting, but attested his fellow board members naivety and ignorance regarding the homoerotic aspects of the Wandervogel life and added that one would proceed more cautiously in this matter if the gentlemen were aware of what interested them in the Wandervogel youth. “That was,” comments Blüher, “a tremendous language that had to be all the more effective as none of the old and young gentlemen actually had any real knowledge of erotic things.” In this context, Geuter attests to Blüher “through and through a trend history , whose second volume obviously served to pay homage to Jansen ”.

Blüher rated a statement by Jansen in personal conversation as fundamental for his own intellectual life: “Where would the strength come from that is capable of evoking such movement among young men, if not from men who love women and are family fathers? to become, loved the youth and founded the men's associations? ”Through Jansen, Blüher also got to know the philosopher and zoologist Benedict Friedlaender and was introduced to the “ Community of Owners ”founded by them and Adolf Brand , an association of homosexual writers, scientists and artists. Brand published the magazine Der Eigen from 1896 to 1932 , in which he campaigned for the emancipation of homosexuals as well as for “art and male culture”. In 1912, Brunotte identified Blüher as a member of both the community of his own and of Magnus Hirschfeld's Scientific-Humanitarian Committee and sees Blüher's early work at the interface or in a bridging function between the different concepts of homosexuality and masculinity on the one hand and Freudian psychoanalysis on the other.

Blüher added a third to the first two volumes of his portrayal of the wandering bird, which dealt with "rise", "blossom" and "decline" under the title "The German wandering bird movement as an erotic phenomenon". He had anticipated resistance to the distribution of his writings in advance of their publication - school director Lück personally took care of the fact that Blüher's volumes were removed from the displays in Steglitz bookstores (but this did not noticeably harm the demand) - and had all three published Volumes secured by contract. It was important to him to "suddenly attack public opinion, all at once, to be there completely unexpectedly, and to be there in such a way that one could no longer be expelled from this position."

“When the printing of the poster sheets was nearing its end, I did the following: I cut out the most harmless parts with scissors, depictions of landscapes, driving events, drawings of characters, all of which were written in a skilful Fontane style, and sent them to some of the most important Wandervogel magazines, with the accompanying letter that my story of the Wandervogel will be published by Bernhard Weise soon and that I would ask them to print the attached excerpt. No sooner had the letters been sent than it rained down on urgent inquiries: What is that ...? After all, they hadn't found out the slightest bit about it, they asked for more precise information immediately, but especially asked that if possible, the whole work should be sent in proofs so that one could get an overview; of course that was what I absolutely had to prevent. "

Blüher wrote to those interested that he had cut up all the sample copies and sent them to editorial offices in large areas, so he could not deliver the whole thing for inspection. However, if you order a larger item, you would receive the exclusive right of distribution within an appropriate blocking period. So he managed to sell 1500 copies of the first volume in one fell swoop. For the publication of the second and third volumes six months later, he signed preliminary contracts for advertising and distribution with numerous newspapers, which then had to be fulfilled regardless of the daring content of the work:

“Terrible situation! It must have been a feeling like someone who has swallowed poison and now knows with complete certainty: in a few minutes the terrible cramp in the intestines that destroys you will begin. The dreaded book came upon them with an uncanny certainty; they were surrounded on all sides and there was no escape. And now the rumor, which I confirmed, arose that a 'third volume' would appear. What might be in this ...? I received letters about letters from wandering bird circles warning me not to play with the 'vital interests' of young people and not to take it too far. I wouldn't want to destroy something that I had helped to build. But I remained unshaken in the decision I had once made, and once it had started my war plan worked like a general mobilization with unauthorized mechanisms. [...] That was the big blow. The Wandervogel bourgeoisie was in an unheard of excitement, the school authorities were likewise, the parents, confused and at a loss, didn't know what to say, in short, there was a great commotion. "

The journalist Christian Füller sees Blüher as a defender of pederasty .

Freudians of their own style

In the final phase of his work on the Wandervogel story, Blüher reports in his memoirs, the psychotherapist Heinrich Koerber, who was entertaining a discussion group on Sigmund Freud's teaching at home in Lichterfelde-Ost, opened a theoretical problem for him, the Blüher's homoerotic approach to interpretation Migratory bird movement concerned. Until then it was unclear for him “that at least the same number of youth leaders who devoted all their time to the Wandervogel instead of going to the woman did not commit any erotic acts, even - and that seemed to me to be incomprehensible - passionately fought against these acts and, where others committed them, pursued them with passion as well. ”Koerber referred him to reading Freud, which at the time was only known in specialist circles. In his remarks on the Oedipus complex , Blüher fell "like scales from his eyes":

“I got to know the basic concept of repression. This has the same effect in the field of empirical psychology as the concept of gravity in mechanics. If one does not know such basic concepts - which can only be discovered by genius - one cannot pursue the associated science at all; unless one is content with mere perceptual judgments. The concept of repression presupposes the law of the indestructibility of psychic energy and confirms it in exactly the same way as the preservation of non-psychic energy is first confirmed by the discovery of the mechanical equivalent of heat. [...] Freud's concept of repression means that a sexual drive, if it appears unsustainable to the conscious mind, is pushed into the unconscious by an unconscious psychological mechanism - that of repression - but is by no means subject to annihilation there - which is because of the a priori certain conservation of energy is impossible - but given a 'negative sign', when fear, disgust, shame, etc. reappear when it is brought back into consciousness by an awakening motive. After I had grasped this thought, which was impressive because of its magnificence and simplicity, the whole situation between the male heroes and their pursuers became clear to me in a flash. They were both cut from the same cloth; both were totally addicted to the youthful male human being […] But the male hero said yes to his own nature, knew it and lived by it; the persecutor, however, repressed this dilapidation and its extreme voluptuous form of expression. So the transformation into fear took place. [...] So the persecutor fights - and in vain - against the insight that he could be a boy lover, and to be on the safe side, he relocates his inner theater of war to the outside; he pursues the accomplished self-affirming male heroes. With this 'outside theater of war' theory, the riddle was solved for me and the game was won. My theory had stepped out of the sphere of perceptual judgments and became an empirical judgment, that is, a real science, and publication was thus permissible. "

In the scandal-making volume "The German Wandering Bird as an Erotic Phenomenon", Blüher emphasized his and his companions' disinterest in the opposite sex:

“Even the first old wandering birds that met in that Berlin suburb had the reputation of being“ enemies of women ”. That is to say, one never saw her involved in good love conflicts with girls on the main street towards evening. The migratory birds did not 'puss'. Nor did they go to the dance class; but if someone did so at the urging of the relatives, he could be sure of the most select teasing. A wandering bird with a girl would have been perceived as a decline in style that would have spoiled the whole vagante mood at one stroke. It was as if the female sex did not exist for this youth; they didn't even talk about it. "

In order to favor the public acceptance of his Wandervogel interpretations, Blüher did not stop at contractual arrangements, but, as an unknown young author, sought professional support for his views: “I therefore turned to two particularly excellent bodies in sex science: the greatest material expert of the present specialty Dr. Magnus Hirschfeld - Berlin and the greatest sex theorist Prof. Dr. Sigmund Freud - Vienna. ”His approach was“ recognized and found to be good ”by both and others asked for examination; Hirschfeld even agreed to a preface for Blüher's third Wandervogel volume. This made him an important source of information for Blüher's demand for homosexual freedom of movement:

“In one of his essays, Magnus Hirschfeld makes the very subtle remark that homosexuals, because they often have simple favorites, with their love become the most useful promoters of balancing class antagonisms. [...] That would be the positive side, the profit entry for people's life. The negative is no less important: the loss compensation. Since, according to Freud's research, a more or less strong inverted impact can always be shown in the neurotics on a psychoanalytical basis, which in the event of an unsuccessful repression helped to produce the disease, the release of the inverted love complex becomes a psycho-sanitary requirement in the interests of the Volktumes. "

Blüher's commitment to the teachings of Sigmund Freud was fundamental and far-reaching for him. In them he saw “the undoubted climax of previous psychiatry [...] and we want to get used to lowering the applause of joyful scholars who agree with us than the opposition of orthodox Freudians. Because today in psychology to think in anticipation of joy is about as funny as in epistemology to metaphysize in a pre-Kantian way. ”Unlike Freud, however, Blüher did not understand homosexual inclination as caused by psychological processes, but as innate, and thus defied himself from him:

“Which gender I am forced to love has been decided in an area that lies beyond the psychological. […] How I behave towards the beloved sex during my life is subject to psychological laws that can be proven. It was a mistake in Freud's thinking that he wanted to conceive of male eros as a result of psychic processes, that is to say, in the end, as a deviation from the male-female norm. Despite the extensive correspondence that I had with him at the time, he did not want to recognize the autonomous origin. So here we parted ways. "

The difference to Freud was that Blüher did not see any neurotic undesirable development due to the oedipal problem in his “male heroes” . Blüher only considered latent and female homosexuality to be pathological, but not sexual inversion in men. According to Geuter, with his criticism of psychoanalysis, which cannot explain the “healthy fully inverted”, he “hit the right point”. Just as Blüher later fell out personally with Freud through anti-Semitic remarks, the relationship with his other sponsor Magnus Hirschfeld was also reversed, to whom he held the arbitrary cut of his own contribution in the yearbook for sexual intermediate stages and whom he, as a representative of a “Jewish-liberal Kulturanschauung ”. With defamatory intent he placed Hirschfeld in an environment of “deformed men”, “whose racial degeneration is characterized by an overly strong talent for feminine substance.” In his memoirs, Blüher also claimed, contrary to fact, that the yearbook in question contained illustrations in order to make it palatable .

Lateral thinker between eros and the state

The two-volume work The role of eroticism in male society , published in 1917, Blüher gave the subtitle: "A theory of the human state formation according to nature and value". In it he saw himself on the trail of a natural law that has not been grasped by any modern thinker.

From the universal validity of the mechanism of repression, Blüher concluded that same-sex impulses shape society to a far greater extent than a perception that denies and represses sexuality would even seem possible. The confusion between androgyny and bisexuality leads in a completely wrong direction : the sexual orientation does not follow from how far someone is a masculine or feminine type. But it is innate and therefore fate. He called this orientation "inversion" to emphasize that it was a natural creation of the first order, while the "term homosexuality invented by psychiatrists or rather out of thin air" merely classifies and pathologizes. Seen in this way, "the so-called homosexual is not a blasted piece of humanity, rather he is the special case of a much larger superordinate genus of man whom I have called the inversus type", or, analogous to womanizer, the "male heroes".

This tendency towards one's own sex is - even without repression, especially with it - not a symmetrical reflection of the tendency towards the opposite sex, and the dynamics arising from this are fundamentally different from that:

“While nature has now released man's love for woman and lets it flow out openly, deducting the usual inhibitions of shame, she has bound man's love to man [...]; male-male eros is constantly associated with spiritual goods and has a heroic lifestyle. The male-female is idyllic. While the sociological line of male-female love is family, the corresponding line in male-male love is called 'male society'. This is used by nature beyond the men's associations to found a state. So there can be no question of the family being the 'nucleus of the state'. "

The fact that man is a state-building being is not due to an economic reason, but to nature itself, which, like some other species, created him for this purpose.

“Nature has succeeded - teleologically speaking - in humans, in firmly socializing a species, without obscuring large parts of the individual species. In humans, it does without a so-called third gender. The only known three animal species that form real states besides man have to endure a crippled type among themselves who even exercises dominion, and therefore do not get around to using the state as a means of the spirit. The state gets absolute value. Only man succeeds in making the big leap, because his sociality is not forced by formations that break the full development of the personal force, the ethical soul. Nature created two kinds of men - one who is addicted to women, the other who is addicted to men, the type inversus. How this decline is expressed, whether with a freely erupting sexuality or with repressed and transformed, is a second question that can only be solved by analytical psychology according to the method of Professor Sigmund Freud. While the male species, which has fallen into disrepair with women, is called to the family, it is the task of the inversus type to form the male society. An uninterrupted rhythm oscillates between family and male society, which can be felt in all of humanity, and these two poles, which are created by sexuality, are the last recognizable structure of the human socialization process. "

In the "Role of Erotic ..." as well as in the "Speech of Aristophanes " written shortly before his death , in which Blüher confesses that he turned to other topics, but by no means changed his previous convictions, a broad spectrum serves using examples from history, literature and contemporary history to explain his theses. Classical antiquity comes first , along with tribal cultures with their men's houses, Normans , bands of robbers , orders of knights , Templars , Freemasons , student associations , as well as SA and SS . The latter as extreme confirmations of the relation: pressure of repression inwards = pressure of persecution outwards. They are examples of how, under the pressure of the most brutal repression, both eros and spirit can turn into their opposite.

The concept of eros is central to Blüher. Eros is the “guiding form” that human sexuality takes on. Its effect is the unconditional "affirmation of a person apart from his or her worth ... not because you" want "it, but because you have to want it." This autonomous power, which like no other affects people as fate, is polarized by Blüher , thus creating tension, opposite the spirit that creates supra-personal values. In male-male relationships, this tension acquires a special, often tragic, dynamic, which is deeply connected with the nature of the man. Because spirit is the peak of masculinity just as Eros is that of femininity:

“No cultural values ​​of ultimate justification come from women, and spirit is - precisely in the final, productive view, not in a reflected - secondary male gender characteristic . The highest point where a woman can get is love, and it is an act of the most perfect chivalry against her if one regards her as sacrosanct wherever she loves and in the state of her highest and only dignity. "

Fundamental criticism of the education system

Blüher's position on education was ambivalent. On the one hand, he acknowledged the idea of ​​the humanistic grammar school as well as that of the university; on the other hand, he sharply criticized the existing educational institutions, which he accused of betraying their original ideal. This criticism referred not only to the practice of imparting knowledge, which he had experienced as a pupil and later as a student, but to the educational concept as a whole. At its core was the accusation that the focus is not on dealing with intellectual content for its own sake, but that the acquisition of knowledge serves primarily or exclusively for “training for the struggle for life”. Therefore, the aim of the modern school is in every respect the same as that of the ancient sophistry , which taught the student methods for achieving success in politics or in court regardless of the content represented. In this way the youth are supposedly formed, but in truth they are soulled. From Blüher's point of view, the acquisition of technical skills of all kinds, as well as all “ordinary activities that are always in the immediate service of expediency and the useful”, are absolutely subordinate to true spiritual endeavors. He believes that the fundamental difference in rank between “pennilessness”, i.e. all occupations that primarily serve to secure income or aim at a more comfortable life, and the intellectual creative activity of a philosopher or mathematician was a matter of course for the ancient Greeks. In the modern school and university system, however, this ranking is blurred, for example by equating the high school diploma with that of the humanistic grammar school, which is "the only real educational institution".

He based the damning judgment that Blüher made on the university's operations on his experience as a student. In retrospect, he viewed his sixteen-semester university studies in the fields of classical philology, philosophy, German studies, biology and theology, which he began in Basel after graduating from high school in 1907 and continued in Berlin, like a business relationship between a customer and a salesperson. The modern universities are "nothing more [...] than real intellectual department stores in which you can buy good goods for good money"; beyond that, they have no authority, and they should honestly acknowledge that. He commented on the termination of his doctoral thesis on Schopenhauer (on the "fourfold root of the principle of sufficient reason"):

“But in the matter itself I can only report sad things. No sooner had I started the arduous work than I also realized its truly overwhelming redundancy. It turned out that I am incapable of any work that someone else might as well do. And so it became clearer to me that I was only allowed to do things that only I could manage on my own. And that's how it stayed. "

The starting point of Blüher's reflections on education is the question of the meaning and aim of dealing with antiquity, which formed a central part of high school teaching. According to his conviction, the only point of an encounter between modern youth and ancient Hellenism is that the Greeks are the "means of procreation" that help those who encounter them to set free the creative power of their own mind. Only as such an “inflammatory substance” is ancient literature still valuable. As a rule, however, the educators are unable to enable the students to have such an encounter. As classical philologists, you are committed to a completely different approach, the method of classical studies. This is limited to determining objective facts about the externalities of the life and work of ancient authors by means of historical-philological research (especially textual criticism ). With this "will to truth" directed towards the really irrelevant, one could "keep the exciting forces at bay" with which one would have to deal if one actually got involved in the content of the texts instead of only superficially examining their form:

“There can be no doubt that Winckelmann , Schiller and Goethe , who the Germans considered interpreters of the Greeks before Nietzsche , were just as wrong about their empirical reality as Nietzsche did. The creative man does not need the truth. [...] Classical science is nothing more than undoing the errors of great men; for if there were no great men who ignited the Greeks, no one in the people cared about them. [...] Classical philologists [...] should be ignored as educators at all. [...] It depends on the sacred errors of the great, not on the truths of the little people. [...] Science is a means against the truth. Anyone who pursues science and cannot get rid of it can always be said to be defending himself against another knowledge. "

The specific reason for Blüher's polemic against classical philology was the journalistic attack of the classical philologist Ulrich von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff on Nietzsche, who caused a sensation at the time. Blüher saw Wilamowitz as a representative of the “bourgeois type” in the role of the scholar. He saw the main characteristic of this type as being “to keep away from all exciting things both in man and in nature and not let them get to them. [...] He keeps the wild animal in the zoological gardens and he keeps the philosopher in the universities. ”Nietzsche, on the other hand, had“ suffered the great fate: he came across the Greeks, and all of a sudden his being was stirred up ” “a new way of life has emerged; at constant risk of death for the one who announced it for the first time. ”Wilamowitz did not want to face this kind of challenge, but instead carried out“ the adaptation of Greek culture to the bourgeois living room and the Protestant rectory ”.

After the publication of a pamphlet directed against Wilamowitz by Blüher, he was summoned to appear before the philosophical dean's office - officially because of another publication. Despite the threat of being shown by the police, he refused to appear - somewhat indignantly because of his apparently neglected fame as a writer. He then accepted the “consilium abeundi”, which Wilamowitz had signed in absentia, and ended his studies without a formal qualification.

Political and ideological confessions

The time-critical and polemical argument that Blüher had with the church, state and the prevailing value horizon of Wilhelmine society from his Wandervogel perspective up to the First World War was replaced by decidedly anti-democratic statements during the Weimar Republic and resulted in a clear commitment to the monarchy, this was linked to the model of a specifically male-union aristocracy. Blüher determined these basic coordinates of his ideological career as follows:

“The nobility is not there by statute, but by nature. The fact that there are also nobility from statutes, the nominal nobility, is only the crossroads of a natural and a social fact. This crossbreeding is not infrequently of a corrupt character, but it is not to be forgotten that it is relatively less corrupt than the bourgeois classes. […] Nature has played a remarkable and undoubtedly deepest and most poignant game by distinguishing certain individuals in the human species with an exuberance and excess of their being, and this at the expense of their family substance. It lets the families swell to a certain extent up to one or more peaks: then in the following generation the approach to the generic norm occurs again. These exuberant individuals are the nobility. "

This nobility, writes Blüher in 1917, is the creator of human spirituality and language. This makes him the leader of the people and justifies a claim to power. From Stefan George's "Star of the federal" citing ( "new nobility, whom you seek, / does not cause ago by shield and crown!"), It differs from the previously over the people only ruling "nominal needle" a "noble birth" who also serve should. The same had to apply to the “master peoples” who had only ever ruled the peoples they subjugated. “But that people should be ruling that is most permeated by the essence of the nobility. Then it will serve the little peoples. "

Prussian monarchist and Wilhelminist

Lifelong exempt from military service due to color blindness and a liver disease, Blüher performed charitable tasks during the First World War, unlike many of his fellow wandering birds who did military service at the front. In the revolutionary phase of upheaval in 1918/19 he took a position in Munich with a lecture on "German Reich, Judaism and Socialism" against his former correspondent Gustav Landauer , who, like Erich Mühsam , who was despised by Blüher, supported the Munich Soviet Republic as a politically committed Jewish intellectual . In his memoirs, Blüher attested to himself:

“It would have been easier for me in my life as an author if I had let myself be engaged by the left wing people who stood by me from the start; but I did not return the favor, accepted their help, but politically placed myself where I was bound to stand by the centuries-old tradition of my family. I have therefore always felt myself to be subject to the King of Prussia, and only this political relationship has meaning and dignity for me, while I do not place the slightest value on being a 'free' citizen. "

“I grew up in a monarchical atmosphere from an early age. When I took my first breath, Kaiser Wilhelm I was struggling with death, but a hundred days after death his son Friedrich III. , and immediately afterwards his grandson hurriedly pushed for the throne. It was the so-called three emperors year 1888. The fact that I was born in it, and that while these three emperors were still alive, had its effect, since I consciously cultivated it. "

In 1928, at the age of forty, Blüher received an invitation from the abdicated Emperor Wilhelm II, who was in exile in Holland, to visit him in Doorn . Further visits and occasional correspondence followed until 1934. In his review of life, Blüher wrote: "But if someone asked me which of the mortals made the deepest impression on me, I would say without hesitation: Wilhelm von Hohenzollern."

On the other hand, Blüher's bond with Wilhelm II was also accompanied by critical perception, as the description of a joint excursion into a pine tree shelter to cut wood shows. When the emperor, who had been practiced in this regard and who could not be surpassed by any of the partners, had worked through his intended amount of time, the cheering rang out: “'Two hundred and fifty trees! His Majesty felled two hundred and fifty trees! '”According to Blüher's impression, the number was“ outrageous and wrong under all circumstances. ”Wilhelm's personal physician, who was also involved in the wood action, commented:“' He is told that he has felled two hundred and fifty trees - and he thinks so! Isn't that terrible? But it has always been like that since '88, and that's why we perished. "

An incident that occurred around two decades ago when they first met in person and that was decisive for both life experiences is illustrated by Nicolaus Sombart as an element that unites Blüher and Wilhelm II: the Eulenburg affair . It was triggered by a newspaper campaign by the journalist Maximilian Harden , who accused the long-time close advisor and friend of Wilhelm II, Philipp zu Eulenburg , of maintaining a group of homosexual acquaintances at home, who then circulated in the press as the “Liebenberger Round Table”. According to Sombart, the Eulenburg affair assumed the quality of a modern media spectacle. "It was omnipresent in hundreds of press reports, newspaper comments, magazine articles and even caricatures, gained shape and momentum and thus unfolded its extraordinary depth and breadth."

The wave of public excitement reached the Wandervogel with appropriate force and penetration, and hit Blüher and his companions. Here, too, similar suspicions and accusations were loudly disseminated as they were raised against the state leadership: homosexual contamination: "The Kaiser, it is said, is wrong in the hands of gays and his policy is wrong and fatal for the German Reich because it is gay policy . ”With his theory, according to Geuter, Blüher also set a monument to this circle of friends of the emperor.

Points of contact and sympathies between Wilhelm II and Blüher arose essentially from Wilhelm II's appreciation for Blüher's writings, which the emperor was thoroughly familiar with. As early as the second volume of his Wandervogel story, Blüher had woven a very friendly image of Berlin society during the imperial period.

“Berlin is a city that is as generous as it is seldom left. Least of all is the clumsy monster of society in Berlin. [...] In Berlin there are Berliners, but they don't rule; their language also remains with the coachmen. Here humanity is placed on a freer level; one can live every inclination, every conviction, every fanaticism and avoid everybody. [...] The intellectually poor middle class of smaller cities could not refuse to reinforce their advancement by moving to the German residence. [...] That's when the 'Berliner' was born. "

Looking back on his encounters with Wilhelm II, Blüher particularly emphasized his in-depth knowledge of the “Secessio Judaica” , a programmatic writing specially written for the youth movement, which, according to Blüher's presentation, was aligned with Theodor Herzl's manifesto on the “ Jewish state ”. From a walk with Wilhelm II in Doorn, Blüher reported that in a lively conversation about Freemasonry , Judaism and the Third International , the Kaiser suddenly quoted something in prose that seemed familiar to him. “Since I had not yet received permission to speak to the emperor on my own initiative and ask what it was, I expressed my astonishment at his rich memory with a questioning expression. But he laughed out loud: 'Now look at these gentlemen philosophers! Don't know their own scriptures! ' I asked: 'Secessio judaica?' 'Well, of course,' said the emperor, 'you hear: I know the important parts by heart!' "

anti-Semitism

Blüher is considered an anti-Semite , even if he rejected this designation for himself. In his work Der bürgerliche und der Geistliche Antifeminismus (1916), Blüher, like Otto Weininger in gender and character , establishes a connection between Judaism and femininity. Judaism is inferior because it supposedly represents “female” instead of “male” values. According to Blüher, Jews suffer from “male weakness” and “family hypertrophy”. They are not focused enough on the nation state and the men's association and are too involved in the family.

In his work Secessio judaica. Philosophical foundation of the historical situation of Judaism and the anti-Semitic movement of 1922 wrote Blüher: “The associative connection of the masculine with the German and of the feminine and servile with the Jewish is an immediate intuition of the German people, which is more certain from day to day Blüher assumes that the historical meaning of Judaism as a chosen people was only the birth of Jesus Christ . After his rejection, the entire Jewish people and thus also every single Jew is “sick in substance”. Due to the " mimicry of blood, name and figure" supposedly peculiar to Judaism , this has so far remained hidden, but in his presence Blüher believed that Zionism was evidence of an end to this Jewish disguise. Now the essence of Judaism is revealed: "Jehuda patet". As a consequence he predicted a worldwide persecution of all Jews: "The threatening world pogrom hangs over their heads".

This publication was based on basic ideas that Blüher had already put forward in his Wandervogel story, where it was said that a German patriotic Jew or half-Jew was a caricature in and of itself. Quite a few would try to “replace the lack of real race with the obtrusive propagation of racial ideals, whereby in their unproductiveness they of course commit the mistake of using the hackneyed phrases that genuine native Germans have long since thrown to the scrap heap - that is, the whole rubbish of glorification of war z. B. and the lackluster attitude towards the ruling house - to be brought up again and again. "

Blüher derived the emergence of Judaism from the “seeding of Abraham” and interpreted it as “a magical-religious founding process of a sacred race in which - the only example in history! - Religion and race are the same. ”Only those who have understood the“ primordial phenomenon of foreignness vis-à-vis the Jewish type ”, which is based on it, can have a meaningful say in this question.

Blüher emphasized a strong personal aversion to the “type of Jewish literate”, to which he assumed a “pathological disorder of a metaphysical kind”.

“They have no state and are therefore constantly constructing new ones out of pure reason; they have no people and speak of its happiness; they preach philanthropy when they have none; they are pacifists because they are cowardly and without peacefulness [...] They propagate 'liberation of all love' because they have no love life. So the abstract, the cheap that everyone can buy is their world, they lack the concrete because they have not grown together with anything. "

Blüher attributed his early supporters Magnus Hirschfeld and Kurt Hiller , who "had repeatedly proven to be a decent and helpful person", as well as Kurt Tucholsky , Maximilian Harden and Siegfried Jacobsohn to this type .

Despiser of democracy and National Socialism

After all the political upheavals that Blüher had experienced with the First World War, the end of the German Empire, the turbulent years of the Weimar Republic, the Nazi era, the Second World War and the conditions in divided Germany, he took in his autobiographical review with the subtitle “History of a Thinker” adopts a negative attitude towards both democratic systems and the Nazi regime. His attitude towards the right to vote was characteristic of his political thinking. Blüher still saw the Prussian three-class suffrage as an "expression of the natural state order":

“For it is clear that someone who is responsible for wealth understands more by analogy about the state than the worker, who is a consumer and does not guarantee anything. It goes without saying that the old, essentially agrarian, three-class suffrage was in great need of reform; but at least it was natural and positive, while the democratic one must result in the permanent dissolution of the state. And that's what happened. "

Blüher made secularized Judaism responsible for the supposed undesirable development, to which he repeatedly attributed fundamental services to the intellectual life in Germany, but which, on the other hand, was allegedly directed against the Prussian-German state structure and brought about its downfall.

If proto-fascist tendencies were and are occasionally identified in the Wandervogel and youth movement , the reference to the respective leadership structures of the youth leagues of the time is obvious. In 1918, Blüher published a special consideration under the title “Leader and People in the Youth Movement” , in which it was stated at the beginning:

“Leader and people are differentiated in the one and important thing: that the leader does not need the people in order to be leader, but that the people only become a people through the leader.
In any other case it is a random set. It is an arbitrary multiplicity of own heads, which are not infrequently stubborn heads, it has as many convictions and interests as it counts belonging, and not infrequently a few more. In this state the people are never the bearer of any value, and no degree of well-trained education, however high, can give them another character. The multitude becomes a people only when they obey; From that moment on it takes on soul and resembles Michelangelo's Adam, who stretches his half-limp arm towards God the Father in order to receive the divine spark. Whatever number of people feel the urge to become a people and to feel the nobility of such a community, needs the leading man for this. "

As Blüher assured in retrospect with reference to the final section of the text, Gustav Wyneken in particular was in mind. "It is not my fault that the catchphrases 'Führer and Volk' with a completely different, even contrary content were later confiscated by unauthorized powers and turned into political clichés."

At the time of the Weimar Republic, Blüher sought political and personal affiliation with the German gentlemen's club , in which for him important personalities of the Brandenburg nobility and West German industry, members of the House of Hohenzollern and high representatives of both Christian denominations as well as Paul von Hindenburg and Franz von Papen " the real bloom of the German culture of that time ”was wrong. "All my attitudes agreed with those of this highest German society, which took a conservative standpoint." Nevertheless, according to information from the club organizer Heinrich von Gleichen-Rußwurm, who liked him personally, Blüher had no chances because of his publication The Role of Eroticism in Male Society calculate to be elected member by secret ballot. He felt bitterly that some of his friends and students were accepted as members, but he himself was not.

Blüher gives June 30, 1934, on which the so-called Röhm Putsch took place, as the decisive date for his more distant stance on National Socialism . Until then, he had considered cooperation and his own corrective influence:

“I still interpreted the Hitler movement as a conservative revolution, because it did indeed contain many conservative elements in the beginning. My otherwise revolutionary nature would have fit in - always on this assumption. But since June 30th everything was clear and there was no longer any doubt. "

It was also the day of Blüher's last meeting with Wilhelm II in Doorn. According to his own admission, the copy of Franz von Papen's speech in Marburg , which he carried with him on this occasion, was fluttered out of the moving express train while on the return journey in order to avoid taking any personal risk in an uncertain political situation.

After the fall of the Nazi regime, Blüher drew an extremely contemptuous picture of the “leader” of the Nazi movement, Adolf Hitler , who had requested Blüher's “Secessio Judaica” to be read in his Landsberg imprisonment. "There was no such completely un-German person like him in the space in which we live and in the time that we can overlook." Hitler's forehead and eyes, said Blüher, pointed to a prehistoric racial anchoring. "I believe that the area of ​​the Neanderthal, which was elevated to a nature reserve under Hitler, is the home of this breed."

Blüher saw his theory of male society also applicable to the Hitler movement: “The two typical representatives were on the one hand Hitler himself, as a displacer and later persecutor, on the other hand Chief of Staff Röhm as a free, very free male hero. They too lived together in peace at first. Hitler, who had read The Role of Eroticism, also recognized that there had to be such a thing and even turned a blind eye to excesses. While the external stimulus event that triggered the persecution in the Wandervogel was the Eulenburg trial, this role in the Third Reich was taken over by Röhm's threatening 'apostasy' from his Führer invented by Himmler and Göring. [...] When Hitler believed that he had discovered a political rival in Röhm, an enormous and unlimited delusions of persecution against the 'homosexuals' broke out in him. "

Hitler himself is described by Blüher as an "erotic cripple" in every respect, who probably surrounded himself with beautiful young men in his bodyguards, but did not have a single friend. "He immediately repressed and referred young people into unwanted marriages in order to make women unhappy, but to make mothers!" However, as Blüher put his own findings into perspective, a nature like that of Hitler could not be fully captured by the laws of the role of eroticism become. But what seemed questionable for Hitler himself, applies in any case to his subordinate environment. He took Hitler particularly badly that the "role of eroticism in male society", which was intended by Blüher as educational reading, was suppressed during the Nazi era:

“However, Hitler banned the 'role of eroticism' and had it crushed. The benevolent effect that had emanated from this book for almost twenty years, in that it created order in the minds of the oppressed and healed countless sick people, including persecutors, was not allowed to be experienced by its victims. This is also an act of sabotage against the truth that was carried out on June 30, 1934; on that fateful day when Hitler decided against the German nobility and the upper class and in favor of the Neanderthals and his provocateurs. "

Of course, Blüher suppresses the fact that his theses were of decisive importance for the National Socialists and their policy of persecution against homosexuals. Heinrich Himmler, who later became Reichsführer SS and Gestapo chief, grappled with Blüher's theories about the importance of homosexuality for the men's association and the formation of states at an early age. In 1922 Himmler read Blüher's book on the “Role of Eroticism in Male Society”, which occupied him a lot. On March 4, 1922, he noted in his diary: “Read the book, it grabs and shakes you deeply, you want to ask what is the purpose of life, but what is it? - Tea. Educated. Dinner. Read again. [...] exercises. ½ 11 o'clock in bed, slept restlessly. ”Blüher's thesis on the constitutive character of homosexuality for the male union and the state made a deep impression on Himmler. But Himmler drew completely different conclusions from this than Blüher's right: “It is clear that there must be a male society. I doubt whether you can call it erotic. In any case, pure pederasty is an aberration of a degenerate individual, since it is contrary to nature. ”Himmler finally developed his own theory, which became the basis of the policy of persecution against homosexuals. To him, homosexuality appeared to be a threat to the state, which, in the sense of Blüher, he viewed as the domain of men. In his eyes, homosexual men strive to subvert state structures, which, however, does not strengthen them, as Blüher said, but on the contrary leads to the “destruction of the state”.

Anti-feminist image of women

For Blüher, family and state were the two essential poles of human social life. He saw women as one-sidedly oriented towards the family, while he said men had a double striving for family and for male society, and saw the latter alone as the cause of the formation of the state. Following Heinrich Schurtz , Blüher asserted that the man “the constant society of women is unbearable and degrading” and that he therefore strives beyond men. Blüher's image of women shows radical anti-emancipatory features:

“The male-male Eros is based on equality, the male-female on submission. […] Bondage is the a priori form of female eros. 'Rape' is therefore just an extreme expression for bondage. This deepest intimacy of women - I mean the desire to be raped - is of course suppressed by ethics, but it does not remove the fact. Rather, it sheds light on things like women's suffrage, women's movement, mother's rights, women's states, which are untenable as they are usually seen. "

Blüher also made a drastic difference with regard to marital fidelity:

“The chaste wife is an ethical matter of course, the chaste man is almost a curiosity. And if one asks why man has always worshiped woman (verecundia), it is ultimately always this . Therefore, there is no male adultery, because the man with this agent does not commit adultery can . There are two exceptions here: if both parties have promised to abstain from the marriage: then it is “pacta sunt servanda” . The second case is the sacramental one: when a marriage is believed to have taken place in front of the altar; because then there are always three of them. This marriage does exist. In freedom, however, only women break marriage by this means. Because the woman does not return. "

The question of how Blüher was able to generate such a far-reaching response among contemporaries with his mixture of misogynistic and masculine statements is answered for Geuter with a fear of men, masking itself in excessive sovereignty in the face of the incipient emancipation of women, in a call that “should show strength and yet betrays weakness ":

“Woe to the man who fell for a woman! Woe to the culture that women surrendered to! - It is a just and natural thing that women give themselves up, but the man who surrenders is lost ... Women forever strive to have a man completely. That trapdoor into nowhere ... calls for a victim. So most men perish on their wives ... But whoever is in the league cannot sink, because he has pledged a best being to the man. "

On the other hand, Blüher treated the girls' associations and women's communities of the youth movement with respect, in which “the lesbian goddess of love secretly wielded the scepter. It was about breathing culture, gymnastics and music, also yoga-like motifs interfered, all of this revolving around the topic of human renewal. And what was particularly feminine about it: it was always about the problem of the "island" of women, this island inaccessible for men ... a zone in the female being that the man does not get and that is not brought into the marriage becomes. Thus the bourgeois man's privilege of the tribades been broken youth movement and its secret societies in fact "; only “nature, in order to make man into a state-building being, did not take advantage of this relationship, but the male-male one. And in this sociological sense only the following applies: There is no such thing as a female society. "

Church and Christianity in a state of change

In his early years up to the First World War, which he later referred to as the “intellectual boozy years”, Blüher painted a highly unfavorable picture of the efforts of local church representatives to prepare adolescents in confirmation classes for the Christian faith and the community of believers. Opposing worldviews such as materialism and spiritualism were, according to his statements, taken to absurdity within half an hour, since they could explain neither the matter of the spirit nor that of memory. Skepticism was also taught about reason , with which mathematical theorems could be proven and many practical things to be accomplished, "but it is not called to higher things, and it is at all a lower organ of the spirit." One of the churchmen taught that the Germans one had a very special inclination towards the religious and that with the German being the world would finally recover.

“That was a clear transition to patriotism, which the school then took into its own hands, and then it was soon the turn of the cannons, the Kaiser's birthday and the enthusiastic triple hurray.
That went on for a year; then came Palmarum and with it the decisive day. Once again they were accused of having to do everything out of completely free conviction, otherwise it would be of no value, and they should rather step back [...] the organ kept rustling and roaring, half a dozen black-hooded aunts, father, mother, sister 'Brothers stood behind each of them, and again strange: they all gave their word of honor out of full man's conviction. - When some of them started to think later, they broke it. "

After graduating from high school in 1907, when he began studying classical philology in Basel and practiced saber fencing, Blüher later stated that he was heavily influenced by his closest friend Rudi (Rudolf Schwandt), who had adopted a consistently atheistic stance. In the endeavor to outdo his friend in this way - Blüher: "I felt incredibly clever and superior, also showed that in my outer gesture, so that one only noticed it" - he not only negated God's existence, but every cosmic order in general: “This is how I came to a consistent nihilism, which now set out to rearrange the world - with an orderless basic idea in its heart. I then called something like that 'intellectual cleanliness' and took all people who believed in God or a higher order of things to be either fools or hypocrites. "

This development reached its theoretical climax when, in 1912, in his treatise on a prize question from the theological faculty of Berlin's Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität on the subject: "The theory of religions and their decline", he concluded:

“Our life has no objective meaning that is founded for all eternity, but only that which the tone and the inclination of our mind, including its spiritual guidance, wins from it. Accordingly, all religious events are to be interpreted purely psychologically, and any connection with the dogmatic is forbidden. With that all religions are judged. "

For a long time, wrote Blüher in retrospect, this phase of atheistic orientation persisted and its end did not come as a dramatic turnaround, enlightenment or conversion, “but it was somehow as if someone - I don't know who - shook hands in the crowd on my shoulder. ”As Blüher then in 1921 under the title “ The Aristia of Jesus of Nazareth. Philosophical Foundation of the Doctrine and the Appearance of Christ " redefined his position, the contrast to his earlier statements was striking:

"Of the powers that exist today, however, it is solely the German being who is called to receive the appearance of Christ and to witness it on the basis of the appearances that resemble him."

In this writing, Blüher differentiated between a primary and a secondary race type, which are not least epistemologically and religiously distinguishable. “Among the religions, the primary racial philosophy is reflected in Brahmanism and Christianity, the secondary in Judaism. [...] In Christianity, d. H. In religion, in which the full truth is enveloped, the doctrine of natural choice is shaped in the choice of grace, which goes back directly to Christ. Judaism, on the other hand, is completely caught up in the idea of ​​progress and efficiency. It preaches justification by the good deed prescribed by law: it is a typical doctrine of the homogeneity of humanity. "

“A bad and mean disposition, which consistently stems from the secondary race”, it is said elsewhere, has made a social teaching out of the teaching of Christ “and made Christ a come for the poor”. Blüher countered this with the words of Jesus: “You always have the poor with you, and if you want you can do them good; but you don't always have me. "

The confrontation with Judaism is repeated by Blüher in the "Aristie of Jesus of Nazareth". Towards the end of the work he expresses his admiration for the ability of this people, who have been "hit by such severe blows", to preserve themselves. Something was still going on in the shattered folk body: “And in fact, destroyed Judaism is already gathering to retreat, that is, to a new birth of the people; this tendency is expressed in Zionism. ”In a footnote, Blüher placed the assertion:

“Anti-Semitism is in part an intended product of Jewish propaganda. The Jew incites the host nations to pogrom so that they shed Jewish blood. You want to make the peoples guilty. But whoever sheds Jewish blood serves the Jew. Woe to the people who step into this most dangerous snare! "

As a “first legal act”, Blüher had left the church at the age of 21 and thus “broke all bridges to a proper job anyway”; According to his own admission, he did not re-enter the Evangelical Church until the Nazi era. In addition to occasional activity as a psychotherapist in his Hermsdorf domicile, Blüher devoted himself from then on primarily to developing his main philosophical work.

Ambitious philosopher

Blüher's literary and philosophical work reveals parallels to the way he described his university studies. He never used libraries, but bought or borrowed the books he needed.

“Only my purposes were decisive for me, not those of learning. So I had to trust that the right book would always fall into my hands, and that has happened to an astonishing extent. I have never missed something that I absolutely needed; the secret paths that fate runs here almost border on the occult. I could cite many cases of bibliomagic in which a helpful spirit always seemed to serve. If someone who is built in this way fails to be lucky, he should stop writing. "

Initially carrying out a thorough inventory in years of studies of the publications of others, Blüher's approach was not, not even from a philosophical point of view: "Because philosophy does not flow from book to book, but is incarnated." He took up the topics that came to him more or less by chance and tried to master them - allegedly without much consideration for others:

“It is obvious that this path, which is direct to nature, is the more dangerous one; it is also the battlefield of the broken geniuses. That one has to walk is attested to him by those occult bibliomagical events of which I already spoke above. On the other hand, the path of learning is safe if one is only diligent. The whole controversy between academics and lay knowledge, between guild and outsider, between clique and genius lies in this duality of ways. The contrast only appears irreconcilable in the caricatures of the extreme cases: the dried up scholar and the depraved genius. "

Motives and access

According to his memories, Blüher developed a burning interest in philosophy when, at the beginning of his studies in Basel, his closest friend adopted a pronounced atheist attitude and Blüher sought a means to dissuade him from it again. He experienced his own breakthrough to a permanent, intensive examination of philosophical questions in connection with a statement in his work: The role of eroticism in male society , which says that eros is an organ, “and a transcendental one. With this formula the steep rise in philosophy begins. When I wrote it down, I didn't understand it myself. What is certain, however, is that from then on I left the psychological and sociological view of Eros and only pursued the philosophical one. "

Blüher achieved the breakthrough to the basic figure of one's own philosophizing, as he has emphasized several times, in an interview with Konrad Wilutzky, who assigned goodness as an object to eros or love as a subjective organ:

"If love is an organ, like the eye, it is not enough to say that it only 'touches' things, because the eye does not touch, but is struck by something that does not shine in itself (light ether), but through which Light becomes; only that justifiably means being an organ . But love is struck by goodness; but this does not appear in the empirical order of things; so the place of goodness lies in the depth of space of nature in perspective behind things. Goodness becomes effective through the activity of love as an organ, namely in ethics [...] And this is also the reason why ethics cannot be derived from the empirical nature of things any more than thinking can be derived from matter finds it constantly linked to metaphysics. "

Man's position on the "axis of nature"

The polar unity of eye and light serves as an example for Blüher's figure of thought of a transcendental “axis of nature”, the poles of which are subject and object. Their discovery is in the service of “a higher humanity. For just as the position of the countries in relation to one another is determined by the earth's axis, so the position of the great powers of the human mind is determined by the axis of nature. ”“ Nature ”is defined as a“ transcendental continuum ”. The criterion of reality is "the direction of flow from the object to the subject". The object is not made, but given.

Blüher contrasts his thoughts with central statements of some of the greatest thinkers of the past in philosophy and science (hardly any contemporaries!), With a clear preference for Socrates , Plato , Kant , Schopenhauer and Nietzsche . This results in vividly described long and winding thought wanderings.

In Socrates and Plato, Blüher found the clearest distinction between ideas and concepts, which he related in his own way:

“The ideas are archetypes of things, the concepts are acts of the intellect for the knowledge of things. So described and defined in this way, they have nothing to do with each other; on paper they are strangers to each other. But that changes when you put them into action and look at their position in nature. Then it turns out that they are exactly opposite each other. They are connected by an axle, like two wheels on a car that can only move if its hubs are firmly connected; or, like North Pole and South Pole of the Earth. But everything revolves around the axis that connects idea and concept; it is the axis of nature. "

The Platonic ideas called flowering also " archetypes of nature" that were in the "world the background".

Blüher particularly appreciates Schopenhauer's distinction between understanding and reason, which is also accessible to animals, that unique selling point of humans and evidence that humans are differentiated from animals. Because reason is demonstrably not a "further development" of the understanding, but a fundamentally completely different quality.

“Therefore it is not a matter of faith if we came to the conclusion: the biblical account of the independent creation of man is right against Darwinian claims, but that can be proven. This certainly doesn’t make you more religious, but at least you’re not mistaken about a vital question. "

Blüher condemns the derivation of the Incarnation from tool manufacture or Darwinian categories as "naive naturalism ":

“... about since the French Revolution (but not through it) ... it begins that the content of humanity is essentially sought in the invention of new tools, whereby it is assumed that these then also one with the improvement of the living situation will bring about those of humanity themselves. With this thought, this same humanity has just unsuspectingly sealed its doom, and one could say: wrong thinking about reason, provided that it becomes mass madness, can plunge peoples and continents into ruin. "

From the point of view of comparative anatomy, Blüher also excludes ancestry of humans from apes and at most considers a reverse relationship of descent to be possible. But he sees the human race “regardless of how many other ethnological races it is divided” into two basic races, “of which one represents the ordinary, the other the noble”. The non-existent reproductive barrier between these two alleged human races causes the loss of the noble substance "and, with transcendental necessity, results in the decline of humanity."

Natural religiosity and judgment of faith

In the last two major chapters of his work, which is devoted to religion and Christianity, with the subtitle “System of Philosophy as Doctrine of the Pure Events of Nature” , Blüher determines the natural origin of all religions in their helping function. The need or the will to pray and hope unites people regardless of the diversity of theology as well as the type and number of gods: “That they can help and do it when they are served and worshiped - this is what they all have in common ; because it is the point that matters. "

The Christian religion understood in the sense of Blühers works analogously to the healing process in an organism . It is about a cosmological healing process of eros, the most vulnerable and deeply injured (cognitive) organ of man, which is decisive for the uniqueness and irreplaceability of the person. Eros is sick, and not superficially, so that the causes can be named psychologically, sociologically, biologically, but metaphysically . The injured love is initially exposed without protection to that objective power through which it becomes a source of evil itself: tragedy in ancient terms, original sin in Christian. The consistent observance of religious commandments does not make anyone free. That is why Blüher does not consider a legal religion such as Judaism to be a path that can lead to real healing.

But is there love because one should love? Blüher believes that taking this ethical imperative seriously can only cause despair or even apostasy from religion, whether it cannot be fulfilled. But this situation had changed because of the appearance of Christ, and not because of his teaching but because of his sacrifice. This caused such a shock in the axis of nature that Eros, the previous organ for the person, also opened up to supra-personal goodness. With this the final healing of mankind and even all of nature from their deepest wound is at least initiated.

Blüher understands faith as "religious judgment"; and with that the dispute between belief and knowledge is over. All religious assertions are true only through faith; to be regarded as a diminished knowledge, a gross misunderstanding. Like every power of judgment in general, belief in particular corresponds to the axis of nature: “Something flows up from the objective side that, coming from the bottom of nature, calls upon man to trust him; that is the power of faith that is given out of freedom. The intellect, however, catches them and forms the dogma in order to be secure even for quiet times. But this is by no means an arbitrary formation of reason, but a necessary one of faith, and comes about almost automatically. [...] Therefore, all the propositions of dogma are only true in faith - although that 'only' means an exaltation.

In relation to Christianity, Blüher sees himself in an urgently important helping role:

"Indeed, at this point, for the first time in its post-Christian history, philosophy has the means in hand to force anyone who speaks about Christianity, be it as its priest or as a layperson, to To show one's colors. Either - says philosophy - the core of Christianity, that is, love, is a derivative of the required neighborly love and is genuinely related to it, and only with it: then the inescapable and destructive consequence occurs that it is based on something that according to his own teaching, is subject to sin in its execution; and then one day no one will believe in it anymore. Or: its core is the love of the Song of Songs Solomon, that is, the natural love: then there is nothing that can ever overthrow it, and one day all other religions will disappear like unsubstantial shadows. For then Christianity stands alone as the sole bearer of the religion that is continually supported by nature. The point in time is when, for the first time in its history, philosophy gives help out of freedom to Christianity - which has become implausible. "

In this context, too, Blüher uses love and kindness as important building blocks of the evidence, insisting on the indivisibility of eros: “Just as one cannot know where lightning strikes, one cannot know where the kindness will strike either whether in the finer districts or in lust. After all, both are only precursors, and only behind them, deeper in the subject, is the transcendental place where the organ activity comes to life. […] It is a grave loss that Christianity suffered in the first terrible centuries of its existence that it fell into the hands of ascetics; As a result, it was distracted from its path in which it is still today and through which it has unjustly gained the reputation of a world-negating religion like the Indian one. But if it is so - and it is irrefutably so - that the core event of Christianity is the organ shift of natural love in the direction of goodness, then this process excludes asceticism in the mortifying sense, even banishing it as a mental naughtiness. "

Blüher describes the fact that the announced kingdom of God has not occurred in the short term or at all and is not recognizable in prospect as a “great nuisance” in the life of Jesus. Nevertheless, Jesus was not a false prophet: “Nature as a whole in its complete absence does not react to false prophets. The core of Jesus 'life lay in the area of ​​its axis, and his life itself is the empirical manifestation of a pure event of nature. ”For Blüher, the sacred sacrifice associated with Jesus' death on the cross is of decisive importance:

“In fact, when he first nailed it, he didn't know what the sense of all this was; but he refuses narcotic drinks. The disciples are of course completely at a loss, simply because they always have been. But in the middle of the desperate words on the cross: 'My God! My God! Why did you leave me?' and the last one: 'It is done!' the breakthrough must have taken place with full clarity of thought. This is the moment when nature breaks into the world and puts it in the state of salvation history. "

For Blüher, that was the moment when goodness found its organ in love. While in ancient ethics there were only acts of nobility (among the Hellenes) or 'good acts' in the legal sense (among the Jews), acts of kindness have now been added as a third element: “These are natural and differ from them from the law, but they are also different from those of nobility. Acting out of kindness is therefore a Christian privilege. ”In conclusion, Blüher gives the following interpretation of the nature of love and eros in the Christian sense:

“From all this it follows that the love spoken of in Christianity cannot possibly be 'charity', but only the real one of the Song of Solomon - which does not allow any allegorical interpretation - and pagan Eros. Because there is no such thing as 'charity'; it is nowhere established in nature. But there should be charity. But what is not, but should only be, cannot be an organ. Here there is no escape at all: either it is right, or religion in Christianity stands on the sand.
However, the Christian character that has existed since the death on the cross contains caritas as its essential component. Only the Christian can love his neighbor and fulfill the law, precisely because this fulfillment takes place 'separately from the law'. There is a final inhibition of humanity in Christian man, which forbids him under all circumstances to destroy the life of his fellow man without hesitation. Antiquity did not know this inhibition. Caritas is therefore a product of the Christian world process. "

reception

The historian Bernd-Ulrich Hergemöller , who created a Blüher bibliography, sees Hans Blüher as "one of the most productive, most-read and most controversial authors of cultural and sexual studies of the 20th century". The so far largely missing scientific discussion with Blüher is mainly due to an "unspoken taboo verdict" because of Blüher's aggressive anti-Semitism and his polemics against the emancipation of women.

Walter Laqueur , author of, among other things, a standard work on the youth movement , believes Blüher to be partly sincere, partly a “poseur and charlatan” who often relied on theatrical and shocking effects. "Some of his theories contained more than just a grain of truth, others are too foolish to seriously discuss them." Unfortunately, the clarity of his style is not an expression of the clarity of his thinking.

Hans-Joachim Schoeps , who was a leading member of the Jewish youth movement until 1933 and was on friendly terms with Blüher after his death, emphasized his respect for Blüher. As recently as 1933, a dispute between the young Jewish religious scholar Schoeps and Blüher had appeared in book form, "Argument about Israel", which was soon withdrawn from circulation by the new rulers. Schoeps saw Blüher's actual importance in the fact that he had raised the problem of erosion “from the medical level, following the old Platonic idea of ​​erosion” to the philosophical level.

Effective radius during lifetime

“Famous or notorious?” Asks Bernd Nitzschke with a view to the fact that the audience discussed the author Hans Blüher in the second decade of the 20th century to a degree that is hardly comprehensible today. Even the recording of the Wandervogel trilogy before the First World War was ambivalent. While for example the reform pedagogue Gustav Wyneken, who played a central role at the youth meeting on the Hoher Meißner in 1913 , was impressed by Blüher's Wandervogel depiction and attested her “a deep understanding of the problem of youth culture”. B. the critic Karl Wilke of a sick book that has stained the honor of the Germanic youth leagues.

Sigmund Freud, whom Blüher contacted in 1912 in order to obtain expertise on the third volume of his Wandervogel story, attested to him: “No doubt, you are a strong intelligence, an excellent observer and a guy of courage and without much inhibitions. What I've read from you is far smarter than most of the homosexual literature and more correct than most of the medical literature. ”The theoretical difference between the two is no longer great; Blüher only had to take into account the relationship “the inversion to impotence against women”, which Freud did not see as completely normal, but rather as an inhibition of development. Freud's judgment was different, however, after Blüher had transformed himself into an avowed conservative politically and ideologically, who, as a Jewish scholar, still attested to a significant discovery for Freud in 1922, but at the same time limited: “These thoughts only become fruitful when they are passed through a German brain that is capable of resisting its treacherous underground. ”From then on, for Freud, Blüher was“ one of the prophets of this time out of joint ”who had nothing to do with analytical science.

A number of well-known and lesser-known poets and writers reacted to Blüher's early writings. From the trenches of the First World War, Blüher received field mail in 1915 from Franz Werfel, who, in a state of nervous exhaustion, found consolation in reading Blüher, as he wrote. Rainer Maria Rilke contacted Blüher in several letters in 1919, stating, among other things, that he had read the "Role of Eroticism" in places with "the most surprised and joyful admiration" and sent further copies to other interested parties. Harry Graf Kessler met him in January 1919 and described him as "probably the most original head among the younger thinkers". Gottfried Benn dedicated the text The modern self to Blüher as “a sign of my unlimited admiration for his work”. A book by Johann Plenge appeared in 1920 with a completely different thrust under the title: Antiblüher. Monkey Association or Men's Association? Kurt Tucholsky expressed himself in his essay The Darmstädter Armleuchter , which deals with Hermann Graf Keyserling , derogatory.

In 1922 , Karl Sonntag, who was part of the leadership of the New Scouts , referred to the “better representatives of the youth movement” in his judgment on Blüher's writings: “We are happy to admit that much of what Blüher says is correct. But we never get rid of embarrassment and displeasure about what he said and how he said it. [...] And it is extremely sad that this 'philosopher' is one of the main reading materials of young people and blocks the way to true literature. It is impossible to reach for Blüher's books in holy and solemn hours. You can only read them at the table, like newspapers ... "

In February 1919 Thomas Mann listened to a Blüher lecture on the subject of the German Empire, Judaism and Socialism , for which he then personally thanked Blüher and for which he noted in his diary: “An excellent lecture, spoken almost word for word from my soul . ”In a speech in 1922, Thomas Mann partially agreed to Blüher's male alliance concept of eros (“ Eros as a statesman, as a creator of the state is an idea that has been familiar from ancient times and is still most ingeniously propagated in our day ”), but declined its use for the purposes of monarchical restoration as nonsense. According to Hergemöller, Blüher's treatise on medicine , published in 1926, influenced "numerous alternative medicine practitioners, homeopaths and psychotherapists".

Little attention and discussion afterwards

Beyond certain homophile, pedophile and right-wing extremist circles who used individual components of Blüher's publications for their own purposes, Blüher received little attention in research for a long time after his death. Hergemöller states that his name is strictly taboo. Hans Joachim Schoeps, Nicolaus Sombart, Ulfried Geuter and, most recently, Claudia Bruns and Ulrike Brunotte, in particular, have set opposing impulses in this regard, aiming primarily at Blüher's homoerotic and male-alliance theories. Schoeps criticized the role of eroticism in male society from a scientific point of view, including an inconsistent methodology, the lack of a reliable psychological foundation and an insufficiently differentiated instinct theory; Such a criticism, however, would misunderstand the intuitive character of the work: “The wealth of ingenious ideas that one finds in it is certainly uncontrollable; but the charm and essence of this book depend precisely on it. "Blüher has contributed a lot to" unveil the type of sex neurotic who is subject to his repressive forces and who becomes so dangerous in the role of the persecutor. "

Sombart takes the view that, in contrast to other European societies, Wilhelmine Germany had a patriarchal social order with a strong male-bond element. Current theories, which tried to interpret the phenomenon of homosexuality not only as anthropological but also as social, moved between an apologetic and a discordant pole. In particular, Sombart refers on the one hand to the theory of Hans Blüher, "in which male-male relationships are viewed as a superior form of interpersonal relationships compared to heterosexuality, homosexuality is related to the polis and the state, which are" a purely male affair "" , but is also related to the spiritual activity as such, which only men are capable of; For Sombart, the other pole is Alfred Adler's theory, in which homosexuality appears as a “specific case of male inability to live” and can be traced back to a male inferiority complex towards women. Sombart regards the Eulenburg affair as “a typical case of homosexual hatred by latent homosexuals. Harden pursued what he was suppressing within himself. [...] The negation of his own homosexual component made him the type of homosexual persecutor. Hans Blüher has precisely described this type of persecutor and the persecution neurosis characteristic of him - in connection with the calamity of the Eulenburg trials; as the story "of the man who has the most monstrous disgust and aversion to contact with his own sex, but who is passionately addicted to it". "

Geuter thoroughly researched Blüher's role in the first violent disputes about homosexual tendencies within the Wandervogel movement, who reconstructed an extensive camp of Blüher friends and Blüher opponents from publications and personal papers. He puts this in the context of an insecurity and disorientation in the relationship between boys and girls around the turn of the century and with the publicly prepared homosexuality affairs at and around the imperial court. Geuter also sees the second high point of the discussions about “male-male love” in the youth movement immediately after the First World War in connection with Blüher's publications, in particular with the work The role of eroticism in male society . In his contradiction to heterosexual norms, Blüher did not come to a “fundamental conception of the liberation of sexuality” because at the end of his theory it was not the lustful man who stood, but “the member of a well-ordered men's society who, as in the knightly order, was in a loyalty relationship with a manager. "

Brunotte, who spans the connection between “warlike politics and technologically upgraded masculinity” in a wide cultural-historical arc right up to the present of the 21st century, sees Blüher's theory of male society as necessary also in the perspective of the “fighting groups and gangs organized as a male union Freikorps, the SA and the SS ”, however, considers the sole interpretation of the Blüher's male association model as preparation for National Socialism to be wrong. "It only takes a small shift in perspective to recognize the demonic doppelganger of republican ideal of fraternity since 1789 in the men's society model - as a union of fraternal friends brought about by intoxicating emotional experiences around the 'charismatic male hero' - of most of which belong in the poison cabinet, his contribution "to the analysis of male-male sociability and the sexual politics of the early 20th century."

In his judgment, Nitzschke essentially aims at Blüher's political orientation and sees in his attitude of “projecting the high and highest into the past and wanting to regain it in the future” a “dangerous disdain for the present, the real, the non-ideal. Hergemöller calls the main philosophical work, The Axis of Nature , “an anti-modernist historical metaphysics”, which was only received positively by a few Swiss and French scientists. Hergemöller justifies his own bibliographical efforts around Hans Blüher with the meticulous scientific research that is a matter of course for understanding the past "with all its excesses and catastrophes", also with regard to those people and thoughts "who have contributed to the destruction of humanity and who have no potential for identification".

literature

Works

(in selection)

• The speech of Aristophanes. Prolegomena to a sociology of the human race. Hamburg 1966. Compilation of posthumous writings. Published from the estate of Blühers
• The axis of nature. System of philosophy as a doctrine of the pure results of nature: Hamburg 1949 (EA), Stuttgart 1952
• The uprising of Israel against Christian goods. Hanseatic Publishing House 1931
• The location of Christianity in the living world. Hamburg 1931
• Dispute over Israel. Hanseatische Verlagsanstalt, Hamburg 1933. A Judeo-Christian conversation with Hans-Joachim Schoeps
• The humanistic educational power. Leipzig 1928

Posthumous new version: Heidenheim an der Brenz 1976

• Philosophy on post. Collected Writings 1916–1921. Heidelberg 1928
• The elements of the German position. Open letter to Count Keyserling on German and Christian matters. Berlin 1927
• Treatise on medicine, in particular the theory of neuroses. Jena 1926, 1928
  • change Version, Stuttgart 1950
• The German Renaissance. From a German. Kampmann & Schnabel, Prien 1924 (published anonymously)
• Judas against himself. From the posthumous papers of Artur Zelvenkamp. Berlin 1922. (Published under a pseudonym)
• Secessio Judaica. Philosophical foundation of the historical situation of Judaism and the anti-Semitic movement. The White Knight, Berlin 1922
  • Modified 3rd edition, Voggenreiter, Berlin 1933
    • Full text edition 1922
• The Aristie of Jesus of Nazareth. Philosophical foundation of the teaching and appearance of Christ. Prien, 1921
• German Empire, Judaism and Socialism. Prien 1920
• The rebirth of the Platonic Academy. Diederichs, Jena 1920
• Works and days (story of a thinker). Autobiography. Jena 1920
  • substantially exp. Edition Munich 1953
• Plural marriage and motherhood. An exchange of letters with Milla von Brosch. Jena 1919.
• Empedocles. Or the sacrament of free death. o. O. 1918. Printed as handwriting, not published in bookshops.
• The role of eroticism in male society. (2 vol.) Jena 1917/19.
• Key words for the free German booth. Hamburg 1919
• In medias res. Basic remarks on people. Jena 1919
• Leader and people in the youth movement. Jena 1917
• One of the Homere and the other in prose. Leipzig 1914
• Wandervogel. History of a youth movement. (2 vol.) I .:  Home and Rise, II .:  Bloom and Fall. 1st edition. Berlin-Tempelhof 1912
• The wandering bird movement as an erotic phenomenon. Berlin-Tempelhof 1912

Secondary literature

• Ulrike Brunotte: Between Eros and War. Men's union and ritual in the modern age (=  small cultural and scientific library, vol. 70). Wagenbach, Berlin 2004, ISBN 3-8031-5170-8 .
• Claudia Bruns: On the construction of the men's union at Hans Blüher. In: Susanne zur Nieden : Homosexuality and reasons of state. Masculinity, homophobia and politics in Germany 1900–1945 (=  history and gender, vol. 46). Campus-Verlag, Frankfurt am Main u. a. 2005, ISBN 3-593-37749-7 , pp. 100-117.
• Claudia Bruns: Politics of Eros. The men's association in science, politics and youth culture (1880–1934). Böhlau, Cologne a. a. 2008, ISBN 978-3-412-14806-5 (also: Hamburg, Univ., Diss., 2004).
• Ulfried Geuter: Homosexuality in the German youth movement. Youth friendship and sexuality in the discourse of youth movement, psychoanalysis and youth psychology at the beginning of the 20th century (=  Suhrkamp-Taschenbuch Wissenschaft 1113). Suhrkamp, ​​Frankfurt am Main 1994, ISBN 3-518-28713-3 .
• Bernd-Ulrich Hergemöller: Hans Blüher 1888–1955. Annotated and commented biobibliography (1905–2004) (=  Hergemöller's historiographical tools  1). HHL-Verlag, Hamburg 2004, ISBN 3-936152-04-7 (Part C on reception. Table of contents ( Memento of November 11, 2009 in the Internet Archive )).
• Susanne zur Nieden, Claudia Bruns: "And our Germanic way is known to be heavily based on our instinctual life ...". The “Aryan body” as the scene of struggles for interpretation among Blüher, Heimsoth and Röhm. In: Paula Diehl (Ed.): Body in National Socialism. Pictures and practices. Fink et al. a., Munich a. a. 2006, ISBN 3-7705-4256-8 , pp. 111-128.
• Jürgen Plashues: A life between black and white. In: Yearbook of the Archives of the German Youth Movement. 19, 1999/2004, ISSN  0587-5277 , pp. 146-185.
• Christopher Treiblmayr: Men's Associations and the Gay Movement in the 20th Century. In: European History Online . Accessed December 29, 2011.
• Alexander Zinn: "Removed from the people's body"? Homosexual men under National Socialism . Campus, Frankfurt am Main 2018, ISBN 9783593508634 .

Web links

• Literature by and about Hans Blüher in the catalog of the German National Library
• Hans Blüher's estate in the Basel University Library

Original texts by Hans Blüher online

• The theory of religions and their decline (1912)
• "Niels Lyhne" and the problem of bisexuality , "Imago", I 1912, pp. 386-400. (PDF; 43 kB)
• The three basic forms of sexual inversion. A sexological study , Leipzig: Max Spohr, 1913.
• One of Homere and Another in Prose (1914)
• Bourgeois and intellectual anti-feminism (1915)
• Ulrich von Wilamowitz and the German Spirit 1871/1915 (1915)
• The intellectuals and the spiritual (1916)
• The rebirth of the Platonic Academy (1920)
• The Aristia of Jesus of Nazareth (1921)
• Treatise on Medicine (1926)
• The axis of nature (1949) (PDF; 2.05 MB)
• Parerga on the axis of nature I (1952)
• Parerga on the axis of nature II (1952)

Secondary

• Bernd Nitzschke: A private scholar in the emperor's carriage - on Hans Blüher's book "The role of eroticism in male society" (1917/19)
• Martin Lichtmesz: Author portrait Hans Blüher (from: Sezession 15/2006)

Remarks

1. ↑ ^{a b} Hans Blüher (biographical information). In: Werner Kindt (Hrsg.): Documentation of the youth movement. Volume I: Basic scripts of the German youth movement. Diederichs, Düsseldorf 1963, p. 558 f.
2. ↑ Hans Blüher: Wandervogel. History of a youth movement. Part two: flowering and decline. Second edition, Berlin-Tempelhof 1912, p. 152 ff.
3. ↑ “But he did not belong to the usual pastor characters who know nothing else. His love was with the Greeks; Classical antiquity was to him the preliminary stage to Christian truth, and to that extent he loved it, insofar as he forgave it. ”(Hans Blüher: Wandervogel. History of a youth movement. Part one: Heimat und Aufgang. Third edition, Berlin-Tempelhof 1913, p. 27)
4. ↑ Hans Blüher: Works and Days (story of a thinker). Autobiography. Munich 1953, p. 25
5. ↑ Hans Blüher: Works and Days (story of a thinker). Autobiography . Munich 1953, p. 16
6. ↑ For Fischer's Wandervogel nomenclature see: "Oberbachant" Karl Fischer
7. ↑ Hans Blüher: Wandervogel. History of a youth movement. First part: home and rise. Third edition, Berlin-Tempelhof 1913, p. 133
8. ↑ Hans Blüher: Wandervogel. History of a youth movement. Part two: flowering and decline. Second edition, Berlin-Tempelhof 1912, pp. 189/191
9. ↑ Hans Blüher: Wandervogel. History of a youth movement. Part two: flowering and decline. Second edition, Berlin-Tempelhof 1912, p. 167 f.
10. ↑ ^{a b} Ulrike Koch: "I found out about it from Fritz Klatt" - Käthe Kollwitz and Fritz Klatt . In: Käthe Kollwitz and her friends: Catalog for the special exhibition on the occasion of the 150th birthday of Käthe Kollwitz . Published by the Käthe-Kollwitz-Museum Berlin, Lukas Verlag, Berlin 2017, ISBN 978-3-8673-2282-9 , p. 65.
11. ^ Anna M. Lazzarino Del Grosso: Poverty and wealth in the thinking of Gerhoh von Reichersberg . CH Beck, Munich 1973. p. 83.
12. ↑ Hans Blüher: Works and Days. Munich 1953, p. 206 f.
13. ↑ Hans Blüher: Wandervogel. History of a youth movement. First part: home and rise. Third edition, Berlin-Tempelhof 1913, p. 54 f.
14. ↑ ^{a b c} Hans Blüher (biographical information); in: Werner Kindt (Hrsg.): Documentation of the youth movement . Volume I: Basic scripts of the German youth movement. Diederichs, Düsseldorf 1963, p. 558
15. ↑ Hans Blüher: Wandervogel. History of a youth movement. Part two: flowering and decline. Second edition, Berlin-Tempelhof 1912, p. 57 f
16. ↑ See: Bruns, Claudia: Politik des Eros, p. 211
17. ↑ Hans Blüher: Wandervogel. History of a youth movement. Part two: flowering and decline. Second edition, Berlin-Tempelhof 1912, p. 49 f.
18. ↑ Hans Blüher: Works and Days. Munich 1953, p. 323
19. ↑ Hans Blüher: Wandervogel. History of a youth movement. First part: home and rise. Third edition, Berlin-Tempelhof 1913, p. VI, ff.
20. ↑ Hans Blüher: Wandervogel. History of a youth movement. First part: home and rise. Third edition, Berlin-Tempelhof 1913, p. 59
21. ↑ Hans Blüher: Wandervogel. History of a youth movement. First part: home and rise. Third edition, Berlin-Tempelhof 1913, p. 127
22. ^ "DIE ZEIT", October 31, 2001, p. 96
23. ↑ Hans Blüher: Wandervogel. History of a youth movement. First part: home and rise. Third edition, Berlin-Tempelhof 1913, p. 131
24. ↑ Hans Blüher: Wandervogel. History of a youth movement. First part: home and rise. Third edition, Berlin-Tempelhof 1913, p. 95 f.
25. ↑ Hans Blüher: Wandervogel. History of a youth movement. First part: home and rise. Third edition, Berlin-Tempelhof 1913, p. 96 f.
26. ↑ Hans Blüher: Wandervogel. History of a youth movement. Part two: flowering and decline. Second edition, Berlin-Tempelhof 1912, p. 185 f.
27. ↑ Hans Blüher: Wandervogel. History of a youth movement. First part: home and rise. Third edition, Berlin-Tempelhof 1913, p. 80
28. ↑ Hans Blüher: Wandervogel. History of a youth movement. First part: home and rise. Third edition, Berlin-Tempelhof 1913, p. 46 f.
29. ↑ Hans Blüher: Works and Days. Munich 1953, p. 219
30. ↑ Hans Blüher: Works and Days . Munich 1953, p. 220f.
31. ↑ Blüher preferred the term inversion to homosexuality on the grounds that inversion made it clear that only the direction of the drive orientation changes and the love object is different, but not the love behavior. (Geuter 1994, p. 83)
32. ↑ Geuter 1994, p. 76
33. ↑ Hans Blüher: Wandervogel. History of a youth movement. Part two: flowering and decline. Second edition, Berlin-Tempelhof 1912, p. 120 f.
34. ↑ Geuter 1994, p. 69
35. ↑ Hans Blüher: Works and Days. Munich 1953, p. 231
36. ↑ Brunotte 2004, p. 72 f.
37. ↑ Hans Blüher: Works and Days. Munich 1953, p. 33
38. ↑ Hans Blüher: Works and Days. Munich 1953, p. 337
39. ↑ Hans Blüher: Works and Days. Munich 1953, p. 338
40. ↑ Hans Blüher: Works and Days. Munich 1953, p. 339 f.
41. ↑ Christian Füller: The revolution abuses its children. Sexual violence in German protest movements Hanser, Munich 2015.
42. ↑ Hans Blüher: Works and Days. Munich 1953, p. 251
43. ↑ Hans Blüher: Works and Days. Munich 1953, p. 252 f.
44. ↑ Hans Blüher: Works and Days. Munich 1953, p. 255 f.
45. ↑ Hans Blüher: The German wandering bird movement as an erotic phenomenon. Second edition, Berlin-Tempelhof 1912, p. 27
46. ↑ Hans Blüher: Wandervogel. History of a youth movement. Part two: flowering and decline. Second edition, Berlin-Tempelhof 1912, p. 114 f.
47. ↑ Hans Blüher: The German wandering bird movement as an erotic phenomenon. Second edition, Berlin-Tempelhof 1912, p. 110
48. ↑ Hans Blüher: The role of eroticism in male society. New edition, Stuttgart 1962 (the first two-volume edition published in Jena in 1917/19), p. 122
49. ↑ Hans Blüher: The role of eroticism in male society. New edition, Stuttgart 1962 (the first two-volume edition published in Jena in 1917/19), p. 20
50. ↑ ^{a b} Jay Geller: Freud, Blüher, and the Secessio Inversa: Männerbünde, homosexuality, and Freud's theory of cultural formation . In: Daniel Boyarin , Daniel Itzkovitz and Ann Pellegrini (eds.): Queer theory and the Jewish question . Columbia University Press, New York 2003, ISBN 978-0-231-11374-8 , pp. 90-120.
51. ↑ Geuter 1994, pp. 16, 308
52. ↑ Florian Mildenberger: The discourse on male homosexuality in German medicine from 1880 to today . In: Dominik Groß, Sabine Müller and Jan Steinmetzer (eds.): Normal - different - sick ?: Acceptance, stigmatization and pathologization in the context of medicine . Medical-Scientific Publishing Company, Berlin 2008, ISBN 978-3-939069-28-7 , p. 90.
53. ↑ Ulrike Brunotte: Masculinities as Battleground of German Identity Politics. Colonial Transfers, Homophobia and Anti-Semitism around 1900 . In: Waltraud Ernst (Hrsg.): Grenzregime: Gender constellations between cultures and spaces of globalization . Lit-Verlag, Münster 2010, ISBN 978-3-643-10713-8 , p. 178 .
54. ↑ Geuter 1994, p. 112 f. Blüher criticized Hirschfeld's theory of intermediate stages for the fact that inversion appears as a feminine quality of man. You misunderstand the male hero. (P. 113 f.)
55. ↑ Hans Blüher: The role of eroticism in male society. New edition, Stuttgart 1962 (the first two-volume edition published in Jena in 1917/19), p. 50 f.
56. ↑ Hans Blüher: “The speech of Aristophanes.” Hamburg 1966, p. 165
57. ↑ Hans Blüher: The role of eroticism in male society. New edition, Stuttgart 1962 (the first two-volume edition published in Jena in 1917/19), p. 18
58. ↑ Hans Blüher: “The Speech of Aristophanes.” Hamburg 1966, p. 165. The “two types of men” should only be thought of as ideal types. In many places Blüher speaks of the “category of bisexuals who give their love to men and who seek lust in women and give it to them. An apparently extraordinary splitting of eros, which I have come across in a hundred variations over and over again in my office hours. ”P. 94 f.
59. ↑ Hans Blüher: The role of eroticism in male society. New edition, Stuttgart 1962 (the first two-volume edition published in Jena in 1917/19), p. 199
60. ↑ Hans Blüher: The role of eroticism in male society. New edition, Stuttgart 1962 (the first two-volume edition published in Jena in 1917/19), p. 201
61. ↑ Hans Blüher: “The speech of Aristophanes.” Hamburg 1966, p. 165.
62. ↑ Hans Blüher: The misdeeds of the bourgeois type. In: Blüher: Collected essays. Jena 1919, p. 41
63. ↑ Hans Blüher: The rebirth of the platonic academy. Jena 1920, p. 10
64. ↑ Hans Blüher: Works and Days. Munich 1953, p. 39
65. ↑ Hans Blüher: The rebirth of the platonic academy. Jena 1920, p. 22
66. ↑ ^{a b} Hans Blüher: Works and Days. Munich 1953, p. 299
67. ↑ Hans Blüher: Ulrich von Wilamowitz and the German spirit 1871-1915. In: Blüher: Philosophy on Post. Collected Writings 1916–1921. Heidelberg 1928, pp. 48-51
68. ↑ Hans Blüher: The rebirth of the platonic academy. Jena 1920, p. 5
69. ↑ Hans Blüher: Ulrich von Wilamowitz and the German spirit 1871-1915. In: Blüher: Philosophy on Post. Collected Writings 1916–1921. Heidelberg 1928, pp. 46, 52
70. ↑ Hans Blüher: Works and Days. Munich 1953, p. 300
71. ↑ Hans Blüher: The role of eroticism in male society. New edition, Stuttgart 1962 (the first two-volume edition published in Jena in 1917/19), p. 322 f
72. ↑ Hans Blüher: The role of eroticism in male society. New edition, Stuttgart 1962 (the first two-volume edition published in Jena in 1917/19), p. 324
73. ↑ Hans Blüher: Works and Days. Munich 1953, p. 399 f.
74. ↑ ^{a b} Hans Blüher: Works and Days. Munich 1953, p. 176
75. ↑ Hans Blüher: Works and Days. Munich 1953, p. 148
76. ↑ Hans Blüher: Works and Days. Munich 1953, p. 170
77. ↑ Hans Blüher: Works and Days. Munich 1953, p. 144 f.
78. ↑ Nicolaus Sombart: Wilhelm II. Scapegoat and Herr der Mitte , Berlin 1996, p. 178. With this sweeping contemporary widespread effect, Sombart contrasts the fact that it is neglected in today's historiography: "The matter is being trivialized [...] There is no book in Germany no monograph on this incident. ”(Nicolaus Sombart: Wilhelm II. Scapegoat and Herr der Mitte , Berlin 1996, p. 159)
79. ↑ Nicolaus Sombart: Wilhelm II. Scapegoat and Lord of the Middle. Berlin 1996, p. 181
80. ↑ Geuter 1994, p. 305. "It is therefore not surprising that after the First World War the Kaiser read Blüher's books in his Dutch exile and received Blüher personally."
81. ↑ Hans Blüher: Wandervogel. History of a youth movement. Part two: flowering and decline. Second edition, Berlin-Tempelhof 1912, p. 96 f.
82. ↑ Hans Blüher: Works and Days. Munich 1953, p. 164
83. ^ Benjamin Benno Adler: Esra. The story of an Orthodox-Jewish youth association during the Weimar Republic . Harrassowitz, Wiesbaden 2001, p. 159; Claudia Bruns: Politics of Eros. The men's association in science, politics and youth culture (1880–1934) . Böhlau, Cologne et al. 2008, p. 442 et al .; Uwe Puschner : Völkische movement and youth movement A problem sketch. In: Gideon Botsch and Josef Haverkamp (eds.): Youth movement, anti-Semitism and right-wing politics. From the “Freideutschen Jugendtag” to the present. De Gruyter, Berlin and New York 2014, ISBN 978-3-11-030642-2 , p. 21 (accessed from De Gruyter Online).
84. ↑ Hans Blüher: Works and Days (story of a thinker). Autobiography. Munich 1953, pp. 95 and 165.
85. ↑ Maria Irod: Antisemitism, antifeminism and the Crisis of German Culture in Early 20th Century . In: Studia Hebraica . 9-10, 2009-2010, pp. 330-339.
86. ↑ Claudia Bruns: The Politics of Masculinity in the (Homo-) Sexual Discourse (1880 to 1920) (PDF; 3.1 MB). In: German History . 23, No. 3, pp. 306-320. doi : 10.1093 / 0266355405gh342oa (currently unavailable) .
87. ↑ Claudia Bruns: Politics of Eros: the men's union in science, politics and youth culture (1880-1934) . Böhlau, Cologne 2008, ISBN 978-3-412-14806-5 , p. 443
88. ↑ Latin for "Judah is openly".
89. ↑ Alexander Bein : "The Jewish Parasite". In: Vierteljahrshefte für Zeitgeschichte , 13 (1965), issue 2, p. 151 ( online , accessed on January 30, 2016)
90. ↑ Hans Blüher: Wandervogel. History of a youth movement. Part two: flowering and decline. Second edition, Berlin-Tempelhof 1912, p. 187
91. ↑ Hans Blüher: Works and Days. Munich 1953, p. 357
92. ↑ Hans Blüher: Works and Days (story of a thinker). Autobiography. Munich 1953, p. 94
93. ↑ Hans Blüher: Works and Days. Munich 1953, p. 95 f.
94. ↑ Hans Blüher: Works and Days. Munich 1953, p. 152
95. ↑ from Hergemöller for example
96. ↑ Hans Blüher: "Leader and People in the Youth Movement". Jena 1918, p. 3
97. ↑ Hans Blüher: "Leader and People in the Youth Movement" . Jena 1918, p. 32: “That in every young generation mankind advances like a breakthrough to what Wyneken calls 'spirit', and that the youth movement must therefore be spiritual movement, that was his knowledge and all his actions came from it. […] Its penetration depends on an act of choice. Wyneken lives neither alone among the youth nor in possession of the majority; he lives as a force under her. Slowly there is a migration from the camp of the many and the trivial to the few and successful. The people are getting bigger and richer, and they will feel more and more that it is unworthy to heed the cries of the tribunes for freedom when one knows a leader close by, who is used to being strict and used to rule, who but has the quality of seeing things through the eyes of the gods. "
98. ↑ Hans Blüher: Works and Days. Munich 1953, p. 245
99. ↑ Hans Blüher: Works and Days. Munich 1953, p. 328 f. Blüher is also said to have tried to gain access to the circle around Stefan George several times in vain. Here he might have wanted to realize his literary vision of the “rebirth of the platonic academy” (Hans Blüher: The rebirth of the platonic academy. Jena 1920) (Brunotte 2004, p. 75).
100. ↑ ^{a b c} Hans Blüher: Works and Days. Munich 1953, p. 169
101. ↑ Hans Blüher: Works and Days. Munich 1953, p. 168
102. ↑ Hans Blüher: The role of eroticism in male society. New edition, Stuttgart 1962 (the first two-volume edition published in Jena in 1917/19), p. 25
103. ↑ Hans Blüher: The role of eroticism in male society. New edition, Stuttgart 1962 (the first two-volume edition published in Jena in 1917/19), p. 28
104. ↑ Hans Blüher: The role of eroticism in male society. New edition, Stuttgart 1962 (the first two-volume edition published in Jena in 1917/19), pp. 26, 28
105. ↑ Hans Blüher: The role of eroticism in male society. New edition, Stuttgart 1962 (the first two-volume edition published in Jena in 1917/19), p. 30
106. ↑ Alexander Zinn: "Removed from the people's body"? Pp. 243-250.
107. ↑ Hans Blüher: The role of eroticism in male society. New edition, Stuttgart 1962 (the first two-volume edition published in Jena in 1917/19), p. 238
108. ↑ Hans Blüher: Works and Days. Munich 1953, p. 444
109. ↑ Hans Blüher: The role of eroticism in male society. Quoted in Geuter 1994, p. 171 f.
110. ↑ Hans Blüher: Works and Days (story of a thinker). Autobiography. Munich 1953., p. 424 f.
111. ↑ Hans Blüher: The role of eroticism in male society. New edition, Stuttgart 1962 (the first two-volume edition published in Jena in 1917/19), p. 265
112. ↑ Hans Blüher: Works and Days. Munich 1953, p. 300 f.
113. ↑ Hans Blüher: Wandervogel. History of a youth movement. First part: home and rise. Third edition. Berlin-Tempelhof 1913, p. 34 f.
114. ↑ Hans Blüher: Works and Days. Munich 1953, p. 210
115. ↑ Hans Blüher: Works and Days. Munich 1953, p. 301
116. ↑ Hans Blüher: Works and Days. Munich 1953, p. 216
117. ↑ Hans Blüher: The Aristia of Jesus of Nazareth. Philosophical foundation of the teaching and appearance of Christ. Prien 1921, p. 36
118. ↑ Hans Blüher: The Aristia of Jesus of Nazareth. Philosophical foundation of the teaching and appearance of Christ. Prien 1921, p. 78. On the other hand, Blüher had the following view in the theory of religions and their decline : “Christianity represents a hybridization between Indian and Jewish religions. We have already seen above that it is essentially a by-product of Western history is and that his yes and no to life fluctuates. A corresponding uncertainty can be found in the importance of action. The Christian is not justified by his own morality like the Jew, but by belief in the redemptive act of Jesus, who has taken on the 'guilt' of humanity. "
119. ↑ Hans Blüher: The Aristia of Jesus of Nazareth. Philosophical foundation of the teaching and appearance of Christ. Prien 1921, p. 185
120. ↑ Hans Blüher: The Aristia of Jesus of Nazareth. Philosophical foundation of the teaching and appearance of Christ. Prien 1921, p. 311
121. ↑ Hans Blüher: The Aristia of Jesus of Nazareth. Philosophical foundation of the teaching and appearance of Christ. Prien 1921, p. 313. Blüher added: “But it must not be poured out for reasons of humanity, but from the knowledge of the wicked magic of ritual. And whoever doesn't know should believe the authority that says it. Nothing more can be said. But if you don't want to hear, stay away from this work. ”(Ibid.)
122. ↑ ^{a b} Hans Blüher: Works and Days. Munich 1953, p. 217
123. ↑ Hans Blüher: The axis of nature. Stuttgart 1952, p. 350
124. ↑ Hans Blüher: The role of eroticism in male society. New edition, Stuttgart 1962 (the first two-volume edition published in Jena in 1917/19), p. 31
125. ↑ Hans Blüher: The axis of nature . Stuttgart 1952, p. 119
126. ↑ Hans Blüher: The axis of nature. Stuttgart 1952, p. 116
127. ↑ Hans Blüher: The axis of nature. Stuttgart 1952, p. 200
128. ↑ Hans Blüher: The axis of nature. Stuttgart 1952, p. 16
129. ↑ Hans Blüher: The axis of nature. Stuttgart 1952, p. 50
130. ↑ See Hans Blüher: The axis of nature. P. 85 "About the archetypal potential of nature"
131. ↑ Hans Blüher: The axis of nature. Stuttgart 1952, p. 311 ff., 352 ff.
132. ↑ Hans Blüher: The axis of nature. Stuttgart 1952, p. 313
133. ↑ Hans Blüher: The axis of nature. Stuttgart 1952, p. 83f.
134. ↑ Hans Blüher: The axis of nature. Stuttgart 1952, p. 332
135. ↑ Hans Blüher: The axis of nature. Stuttgart 1952, p. 338. These ideas, which are partly based on Nietzsche , lead Blüher to come to the conclusion with regard to “the people of Israel”: “With the people of Israel, nature descends particularly low in the secondary race and particularly high in the primary race seized, and this peculiar system ensures it an extraordinary existence for the course of world history. "(Ibid., p. 346)
136. ↑ Hans Blüher: The axis of nature. Stuttgart 1952, p. 369
137. ↑ Cf. the chapter on Paracelsus and Samuel Hahnemann , who Blüher considers to be the same person: one, according to his time, loudly proclaiming like Luther , the other according to his time, encyclopedically enlightening, but both obsessed with the same law, its clear knowledge of medicine as science justify in the first place, namely: nature is man turned outwards - disease is arsenal turned inwards - the doctor (Paracelsus) gives this change. Only then is it possible to name diseases by their correct names, which come from the object, and thus knowledge would be just as pure a natural event as healing. Hans Blüher: The axis of nature. Stuttgart 1952, p. 276 ff., Cf. also treatise on medicine, especially the theory of neuroses. Jena 1926
138. ↑ See Hans Blüher: The axis of nature. P. 125ff "Eros as an organ for the person"
139. ↑ See Hans Blüher: The axis of nature. P. 132ff "Eros and Original Sin", P. 135f " Medea and the source of evil". Cf. also Hans Blüher: “Parerga to the axis of nature”, Stuttgart 1952, p. 95: “Exact mythology of the fall of man explained in the Hebrew text”. A fugue on the Hebrew keyword jada in Genesis 3, the scope of which includes both cognition, knowledge and desire, pleasure. Blüher comes to the conclusion that the “apple bite” is only the inevitable trigger of doom, the deeper reason lies in the character of creation.
140. ↑ See Hans Blüher: The axis of nature. P. 387 "The Law and the Antinomy of the Law"
141. ↑ See Hans Blüher: The axis of nature. P. 422ff "Law and Gospel"
142. ↑ See Hans Blüher: The axis of nature. P. 568 ff. "The breakthrough at Golgotha ​​and world history"
143. ↑ Hans Blüher: The axis of nature. Stuttgart 1952, p. 383
144. ↑ Hans Blüher: The axis of nature. Stuttgart 1952, p. 384
145. ↑ Hans Blüher: The axis of nature. Stuttgart 1952, p. 418
146. ↑ Hans Blüher: The axis of nature. Stuttgart 1952, p. 419 f .; elsewhere it is affirmed: "But no one has access to religion who does not, happy or not, know earthly love." (Ibid., p. 572)
147. ↑ Hans Blüher: The axis of nature. Stuttgart 1952, p. 432
148. ↑ Hans Blüher: The axis of nature. Stuttgart 1952, p. 436
149. ↑ Hans Blüher: The axis of nature. Stuttgart 1952, p. 569
150. ↑ Hans Blüher: The axis of nature. Stuttgart 1952, p. 571
151. ↑ Hans Blüher: The axis of nature. Stuttgart 1952, p. 572 f.
152. ↑ ^{a b} hergemoeller.de ( Memento from November 11, 2009 in the Internet Archive )
153. ^ Walter Laqueur: The German youth movement. Verlag Wissenschaft und Politik, Cologne 1978, pp. 63, 66
154. ↑ Hans-Joachim Schoeps (editor) in the foreword to the new edition by Hans Blüher: The role of eroticism in male society. Stuttgart 1962, pp. 6, 10
155. ↑ ^{a b c} Bernd Nitzschke: A private scholar in the emperor's carriage - about Hans Blüher's book "The role of eroticism in male society" (1917/19)
156. ^ Gustav Wyneken: Wandervogel and free school community. From: Die Freie Schulgemeinde, No. 2, from January 1913. Quoted from Werner Kindt (Hrsg.): Documentation of the youth movement. Volume I: Basic scripts of the German youth movement. Diederichs, Düsseldorf 1963, p. 84
157. ↑ ^{a b} quote from Bernd Nitzschke: A private scholar in the emperor's carriage - on Hans Blüher's book "The role of eroticism in male society" (1917/19)
158. ↑ Hans Blüher: Works and Days. Munich 1953, p. 35
159. ↑ Hans Blüher: Works and Days. Munich 1953, p. 348
160. ^ Harry Graf Kessler: Diary , January 3, 1919.
161. ↑ Hans Blüher: Works and Days. Munich 1953, p. 353
162. ↑ Kurt Tucholsky: Der Darmstädter Armleuchter: “But tell me who your opponents are, and I will tell you what kind of guy you are. This one, for example, has flowers. ”“ That is the philosopher of the western suburbs of Berlin, where the petty bourgeoisie live, an eternal Steglitzer. He kept something quite infantile into his manhood - not something boyish, but a halted schoolboy fantasy: everything he writes today still bears the pimples of a difficult time. So he wrote an 'open letter' to Hermann Keyserling: 'In German and Christian matters': an accountant who goes to a masked ball as Martin Luther. The thing is called 'The Elements of the German Position'. ”“ I don't know what the two of them want from each other. Keyserling has declared the other to be a great magician, and Bliher hunched around in front of him, a rather hideous sight. Page 41: 'Of all countries, Germany has the most striking and infallible two such obligatory figures who have already moved into the mythical sphere due to their age and who therefore, indeed only because of this, have true historical power.' Who? - 'Hindenburg and Stefan George.' This is the most beautiful 'and' that has ever been written in German. ”“ In Blüher, the battle of the tertia is raging through and through. 'There is no need to speak of George; but it may be new to you to learn that Hindenburg is the most respected man in the world. ' Ask the head of the Universal Post Office in Steglitz and he will confirm that. "
163. ^ Karl Sonntag: Hans Blüher. Quote n .: Werner Kindt (Ed.): Documentation of the youth movement. Volume I: Basic scripts of the German youth movement. Diederichs, Düsseldorf 1963, pp. 322, 325
164. ↑ Brunotte 2004, p. 88
165. ↑ Thomas Mann: From the German Republic. Gerhart Hauptmann on his sixtieth birthday. In: Ders .: Essays, Vol. 2. Frankfurt a. M. 1993, p. 153 f. Quoted from: Brunotte 2004, p. 88. Thomas Mann also brought right-wing feminine murders into connection with the Männerbund: “The political attitudes of his believers are usually nationalistic and bellicose and it is said that relationships of this kind form the secret cement of monarchist alliances, yes that an erotic-political pathos based on the pattern of certain ancient friendship and love affairs was the basis of individual terrorist acts of these days. "(Quoted from Brunotte 2004, p. 102)
166. ↑ http://www.hergemoeller.de/hans-blueher.htm ( Memento from November 11, 2009 in the Internet Archive )
167. ↑ Hans-Joachim Schoeps (editor) in the foreword to the new edition by Hans Blüher: The role of eroticism in male society. Stuttgart 1962, p. 6 f.
168. ↑ Nicolaus Sombart: Wilhelm II. Scapegoat and Lord of the Middle , Berlin 1996, p. 72 f.
169. ↑ Nicolaus Sombart: Wilhelm II. Scapegoat and Lord of the Middle. Berlin 1996, p. 201
170. ↑ Geuter 1994, pp. 98-103
171. ↑ Geuter 1994, p. 14 f. With a view to the social present, Geuter takes up the "second great wave of women's emancipation" in the 1970s, "as back then" accompanied by "a coming out of homosexuals", and reflects on an intensification of the gender struggle and irrational male reactions to the emergence of the Liberated woman: “That reminds of the youth movement. The men of today do not look for a way out in groups of wandering birds, but just like back then, sensitive parts of them find themselves together in groups of their own: in groups of men in which the journey goes inward and the tender and vulnerable and, more recently, wild man again is discovered. The difficulty of arriving at an adult gender identity has increased. Instead of prolonged puberty, we now know postadolescence, which can be stretched at will. Like the former, it is today primarily a phenomenon of the educated classes. Lifelong unfinishedness as an eternal willingness to change became a new ideal there. ”(Ibid. P. 309 f.)
172. ↑ Geuter 1994, p. 169. "Perhaps that is the reason why Blüher did not advocate the sexual expression of homosexuality in his work, but placed the state and covenant-forming power of homosexual feelings in the foreground." ( ibid.)
173. ↑ Brunotte 2004, p. 7 f., P. 14, p. 73. For Brunotte, Blüher's early work has the quality of a “seismographic diagnosis of time”, which is to be reconstructed as a “significant source of time in the history of mentality”. (Ibid. Pp. 72, 78)