Shame for Germany
The saying a " shame for Germany " comes from a remark made by the German Crown Prince and later Emperor Friedrich III. that he made in February 1880 in a closed session of the Victoria National Invalid Foundation to the Berlin city council and chairman of the Jewish corporation in Berlin Meyer Magnus. With these words, the Crown Prince condemned the anti-Semitic movement. "He was ashamed of this agitation by foreigners abroad." - This is how the Prussian MP Eugen Richter reported on the Crown Prince's words, which were often quoted in the fight against anti-Semitism, but which anti-Semitic parties viewed as doubtful or even falsified.
variants
The exact words of the crown prince have not survived. Depending on the source, the saying is also reproduced as “a shame of our time” , “a shame of the century” or “a shame for the German nation” .
context
Anti-Semitism , which had been smoldering for several years , received an upswing in the late 1870s. Decisive for this were the agitations of the court preacher Adolf Stoecker and the publication of the article "Our prospects" by Heinrich von Treitschke in the Prussian yearbooks , from which the so-called " Berlin anti-Semitism dispute " developed.
procedure
The Crown Prince Friedrich Wilhelm and his wife Victoria condemned the anti-Semitic movement from the start. In a letter he wrote:
"We are ashamed of the rabble-rousing against Jews, which in Berlin exceeds all limits of decency, but it seems that it is certainly 'guaranteed' under the wing of the court clergy."
And the Crown Princess Victoria complained:
“The contempt for everything foreign, including the poor Jews, is really outrageous . The result will only be that this language u. this behavior Germany u. will make the Germans thoroughly hated! "
As early as the beginning of 1880, the Crown Prince demonstratively attended a service in full uniform in the Berlin synagogue to take a stand on the anti-Semitic movement. At a meeting of the Victoria National Invalid Foundation in February 1880, he spoke to Meyer Magnus, the deputy chairman of the foundation and chairman of the Jewish corporation in Berlin, about the anti-Semitic movement and described it as a "disgrace for Germany".
In the course of 1880 the anti-Semitic agitation intensified and the first assaults occurred (see Kantorowicz affair ). In the middle of November 1880, 75 eminent scientists, entrepreneurs and politicians published a notable declaration in which they condemned the anti-Semitic movement. The German Progressive Party brought the issue to the Prussian state parliament on November 20 and 22, 1880 (see Hänel interpellation ). On November 14th, the Crown Prince in Wiesbaden demonstratively attended "a synagogue concert ... to show, if possible, how we are disposed together with his wife."
In response to an anti-Semitic event on December 17, 1880 in the Reichshallen in Berlin, at which Ernst Henrici had incited against the Jews, members of the German Progress Party invited the electorates of all parties to a meeting in the Reichshallen on January 12, 1881 to demonstrate that the citizens of Berlin were by no means on the side of the anti-Semitic movement, but condemned it. Before the 2500 electors, Eugen Richter referred to the words of the Crown Prince in the closing speech:
"One day it will not be the smallest laurel leaf in our crown prince's wreath of fame that at the very first beginning of this movement, what our deceased colleague Wulffshein heard with his own ears and which is also credibly confirmed on the other hand, - told the chairman of the Jewish corporation in Berlin that this movement is a disgrace for the German nation! (Stormy, prolonged applause.) "
As such a condemnation was rejected by the highest authorities as falsified or invented by the anti-Semitic side, the Crown Prince was compelled to repeat his statement on February 14, 1881. In a meeting of the board of the Victoria National Invalidenstiftung he sat between the head of the Admiralty von Stosch and Meyer Magnus. He asked how Magnus had been satisfied with the past year in which the anti-Semitic movement had continued to spread. Magnus replied that it was
“... was one of the gloomiest of his long life for him. If he and countless of his fellow believers had remained strong comfort in the midst of this sad movement, it would be the living memory of the statement made by the Crown Prince at this point that he regretted the movement and that it was a disgrace for our time. Thereupon the Crown Prince remarked emphatically that he harbored the same view today as he had then, that he decidedly disapprove and reject the intended efforts. What hurts his feelings the most is the introduction of these tendencies into school and lecture halls; This evil seed was thrown into the planting places of the noble and the good. Hopefully it won't ripen. He is unable to grasp how men who are on a spiritual level or who ought to be in line with their profession could give themselves here to support and aids, to a movement that is equally reprehensible in its prerequisites and goals. To explain these views, the Crown Prince consulted a number of recognized recent incidents, going into the history of agitation and its various phases. Occasionally at the meetings, the Crown Prince linked in particular to the words of condemnation that had taken place in the "Reichshallen". "
On the following day, January 15, 1881, these statements by the Crown Prince were printed in the National-Zeitung . In a letter, his mother-in-law Queen Victoria praised “Dear Fritz's speech about the poor, badly treated Jews”. Although the authenticity of the statements was confirmed by numerous witnesses, the court preacher Adolf Stoecker continued to deny the accuracy of the quotation, even if Eugen Richter confirmed it again in 1883:
"The Abg. When in the House of Representatives in 1883 Eugen Richter had questioned the correctness of the communication on the Crown Prince's position on the anti-Semitic movement from the conservative side, in the session of December 6, 1883, Privy Councilor Magnus had personally attended to him of the above-mentioned meeting of the National Invalids Foundation and the statement of the Crown Prince in exactly the same way as in the above-mentioned article of the Nat.-Ztg. were included. "
On the occasion of a defamation process against the Freie Zeitung in 1885, however, Stoecker was certified by a court:
"On the basis of this result of the taking of evidence, it is assumed as proven that His Imperial Highness - if not literally, at least in a manner equivalent to the essential - passed the verdict alleged by the accused in relation to the anti-Semitic movement."
Stoecker stubbornly stuck to his claim and declared in the session of the Prussian House of Representatives on March 31, 1890:
"I have to protest that Mr. Output Rickert has a high mouth that has long been closed and lets talk here again. The expression of this high mouth is never established. (Shout left: Yes! Contradiction right.) "
The legend that words were put into the crown prince's mouth was already firmly established in anti-Semitic circles by that time. Similarly, even the Social Democratic Party historians drew Franz Mehring 's words into question and put the crown prince of Jewish backers out controlled (the phraseology anhochen means celebrate with cheers , while rubbing a variant of the more common word today torn is):
“But Bismarck did not publicly deny the anti-Semitic agitation, rather let himself be honored by it with a thankful reply and did not at all recognize that the most fiery homage of the poor spectacle makers could not offset the growing bitterness of Jewish high finance. This rubbed grade began to tickle him where he was most sensitive. She plagued the Crown Prince, who, kept very briefly by his loving father, was dependent on her benevolence, so hard and so long that he should have mumbled or mumbled something about the "shame of the century", because this word is certain the whole capitalist press from then on played off as the most glorious blossom of human spirit against the anti-Semitic patron saint, never been established. "
Individual evidence
- ↑ Eugen Richter: Political ABC book, 9th edition. Verlag "Progress, Aktiengesellschaft", Berlin 1898, article "Anti-Semites", page 17 (online)
- ↑ Quoted from: John CG Röhl: Wilhelm II .: Die Jugend des Kaisers 1859–1888, Beck, Munich 1993, p. 415.
- ↑ Quoted from: John CG Röhl: Wilhelm II .: Die Jugend des Kaisers 1859–1888, Beck, Munich 1993, p. 414.
- ↑ Quoted from: John CG Röhl: Wilhelm II .: Die Jugend des Kaisers 1859–1888, Beck, Munich 1993, p. 415.
- ↑ Quoted from: John CG Röhl: Wilhelm II .: Die Jugend des Kaisers 1859–1888, Beck, Munich 1993, p. 416.
literature
- Eugen Richter (without naming): Witness Stöcker, a picture from the year 1885; the trial for insulting the court preacher Stöcker before the II. criminal chamber of the district court Berlin I on June 9, 10, 13 and 16, 1885. Verlag "progress, Aktiengesellschaft", Berlin 1885 (online)
- Leopold Auerbach: Judaism and its confessors. Publishing house by Sigmar Mehring, Berlin 1890 (online)
- Heinrich Rickert (without naming): Anti-Semite mirror. Publishing and printing by AW Kafemann, Danzig 1890. (online)
- Eugen Richter: Political ABC book, 9th edition. Publishing house "Progress, Aktiengesellschaft", Berlin 1898. (online)
- Franz Mehring: History of German Social Democracy (5th Edition), Volume 4. Dietz, Stuttgart 1913. (online)