Stefan Scheil

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Stefan Scheil (* 1963 in Mannheim ) is a German historian and politician ( AfD ) who primarily deals with the history of the Second World War and German post-war history. His theses on the causes and course of the Second World War are widely regarded as historical revisionism in contemporary historical research.

Studies, journalism and political activity

Scheil studied history , sociology and philosophy at the Universities of Mannheim and Karlsruhe , where he in 1997 when Rudolf Lill and Wolfgang Altgeld with a dissertation on the development of political anti-Semitism in Germany 1881-1912 to Dr. phil. received his doctorate . He then dealt mainly with the prehistory of the Second World War in Europe and the causes of the war against the Soviet Union 1941–1945 .

In addition to a series of books on this topic, Scheil has written several historical articles for the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung since 2006 . Since 2002 at the latest, he has been writing frequently for the weekly newspaper Junge Freiheit , which has been printing a weekly column since May 2009. He has also been a regular contributor to the Sezession magazine of the Institute for State Policy since 2009. Both sheets are assigned to the New Right .

Scheil repeatedly took part in events that are also organized by right - wing extremists . Alongside Gerd Schultze-Rhonhof and Walter Post, he was the main speaker at the conference Did Hitler want war? dated May 6, 2006, organized by the editors of the historical revisionist journals Deutsche Geschichte - Europa und die Welt ( Druffel & Vowinckel- Verlag) and Germany in the past and present ( Grabert Verlag ). He took part in the annual conference of the school association founded by Dietmar Munier for the promotion of Russian Germans in East Prussia from April 3rd to 5th, 2009, and in 2009 wrote an article for the special edition German History published by the right-wing extremist Druffel & Vowinckel-Verlag .

Scheil was elected as the AfD top candidate in the 2014 district election to the district assembly of the Rhein-Palatinate district , where he was the AfD parliamentary group spokesman. He was also the contact person for his AfD district association. According to his own statements, he left the district council on December 31, 2015 for personal reasons. In the 2017 federal election he was a direct candidate for the AfD in constituency 209 (Kaiserslautern, Kusel, Donnersberg) and received 12.6 percent of the first votes. On the state list, he was in 5th place and thus failed to make it into the Bundestag.

Since 2015 he has been a member of the board of the Erich-und-Erna-Kronauer-Stiftung .

Works and theses

Scheil presented his views on the origin and course of the Second World War as well as on the goals of the participating states in three books: Logic of the Powers (1999), Five plus two (2003) and 1940/41. The escalation of World War II (2005). In it he claims to subject the current state of research to a fundamental revision. As his "main premise" he names "the continuous loss of power of all European nation states and [...] the efforts of the European peripheral and future world powers USA and USSR to accelerate this development". He takes the view, rejected by historical scholars, that the Second World War was not largely caused by National Socialist Germany , but rather the result of an escalation for which the striving for power and the diplomatic failure of Great Britain , France , Italy and Poland as well as the hegemonic ambitions of the USA and the United States alike Soviet Union were responsible. In the last volume of the trilogy, he consequently advocates the preventive war thesis : According to this, the German attack on the Soviet Union in 1941 did not take place for ideological reasons or because of Hitler's long-term plans to conquer “ Lebensraum in the east ”. This only wanted to forestall a Soviet attack on the German sphere of influence.

Under the article heading “Stalin's man in the 'world”, Scheil referred to Sven Felix Kellerhoff , historian and editor of the daily newspaper Die Welt , and the historian Eberhard Jäckel as “Stalin's western apologists”. The fact that Kellerhoff had rejected the preventive war thesis as a “Nazi myth” was what Scheil described as a statement “in the style of real socialism”.

In 2003, Scheil denied in a book against the second version of the Wehrmacht exhibition that the Wehrmacht's war goals largely coincided with the National Socialist racial ideology. He repeated this view in various magazine articles and articles. However, recent research has broadly demonstrated this agreement.

In his book Churchill, Hitler and Anti-Semitism , published in 2008 , Scheil argues that Winston Churchill consciously sought the war against the "Third Reich" and was largely responsible for it.

In 2010 he was co-author of a memorial for Wolfgang Venohr , writer and former member of the Waffen SS . [17]

reception

Historians and specialist reviewers on the Second World War almost consistently reject Scheil's theses on its origins and course and reject them as untenable. In 2000, Jost Dülffer criticized that Scheil had separated the racial ideology of the Nazi expansion policy as secondary in the book Logic of the Powers , portrayed Hitler as a politician with limited power-political expansion goals and tried, with selective interpretation, to relativize NS-German expansion that was not convincing.

Wolfgang Benz , former head of the Center for Antisemitism Research for many years , describes Scheil in the Zeitschrift für Geschichtswwissenschaft 2014 as a historian who, despite a good knowledge of the sources, “only serves history as a raw material for ideological constructs”. In his books he largely dispensed with archival studies and used secondary literature selectively, provided that it served his intentions to relativize the German guilt for the Second World War. To this end, contrary to the facts, he constructs an aggressive war policy for Poland, claims massive "suffering of the 'ethnic Germans'" was typical for "many places in Poland" and rewrote the German attack on the USSR in 1941 as a justified preventive war. Scheil's “real profession” in the service of reinterpretations motivated by historical policy is “speculation in the guise of philosophy of history. The longings of a nationally minded audience can be satisfied and applause from the regulars' table can be satisfied with steep theses, which have been laboriously elaborated from sources and overtake documented knowledge of the historical scholarship. "

According to Sven Felix Kellerhoff , in 2006 Scheil and Gerd Schultze-Rhonhof were among the “few journalists close to the radical right” who still denied the crime of an “unprovoked attack” by the Wehrmacht on Poland in 1939. In 2009 they were also responsible for the fact that Hitler's allegation of an alleged German defensive war against Poland was "even increasing". Since Scheil could not deny the German attack on Poland , he constructed a "diplomatic hopelessness of Hitler Germany", which occurred after the British and French declaration of guarantee for Polish sovereignty in March 1939. In contrast, the following facts should be noted:

  • that, according to the Hoßbach transcript in November 1937, Hitler sought a war of conquest for " Lebensraum " and declared it to be inevitable, at that time primarily against "Czech Republic",
  • Hitler's war course since the Munich Agreement in 1938,
  • unacceptable demands of the Nazi regime on Poland, so that its government refused a mutual border guarantee in March 1939,
  • the "deliberately escalated tensions with Poland in the summer of 1939",
  • that the Wehrmacht had been ready to attack since June 1939,
  • that the "sometimes martial tones" in Poland were meaningless because the Germans were aware of their real military-technical superiority,
  • Hitler's speech on August 22, 1939 to Wehrmacht generals, in which he called for the smashing of Poland and the annihilation of its ruling class and in which he did not expect any intervention by Poland's western allies,
  • that with the Hitler-Stalin Pact, Stalin did not press Hitler to go to war against Poland, but used his will to attack for his own safe territorial gains.

According to Rainer F. Schmidt , Scheil represents “a revisionist view of the prehistory of the Second World War that is not accepted by research”. His theses on Churchill are also "in contradiction to international research"; Scheil could corroborate it "neither with meaningful documents nor with argumentatively plausible evidence". He jump from one story line to the next, projecting his assertions onto "parameters" determined by other situations and blocking out objective facts.

Sergej Slutsch criticized in 2008 that Scheil attempted “through the manipulative use of individual documents to construct downright fantastic versions of the […] Soviet intentions” during the Soviet Foreign Minister Molotov's visit to Berlin in 1940: According to this, Stalin sought “that there would no longer be a German sphere of interest in Europe should". This is a completely unfounded, incorrect interpretation of these documents. Scheil is based on the false "axiomatic assumption" that Hitler wanted the war to end in the autumn of 1940 and needed the political support of the USSR to do so. In fact, according to the sources, Hitler planned the failure of the negotiations with Molotov in advance in order to demonstrate to skeptics in the high command of the Wehrmacht that the Soviet Union must be smashed and prepared with all possible strength. In contrast, because of its expansionist intentions, the Soviet Union sought cooperation with Hitler.

dissertation

Scheil's dissertation met with praise and criticism. After the book edition was published in 1999, Hans Fenske paid tribute to her extensive material; Scheil did not adequately answer his initial question, "how a three percent movement could continuously get mandates". In 2003, Massimo Ferrari Zumbini counted Scheil's work among the “most thorough analyzes of the election results of the anti-Semites” in the German Empire. Peter Pulzer agreed with Scheil's thesis of a regional electoral bloc of anti-Semites and conservatives in 2004 and found the electoral lists listed in the appendix to the work "extremely useful", but explained the voter migration recognizable in them differently. In 2004, Matthias Piefel stated “considerable empirical defects” in the work.

Five plus two

Hans-Adolf Jacobsen placed Scheil's book Five plus two alongside earlier works by history revisionists such as David L. Hoggan , Alan JP Taylor and Viktor Suvorov at the beginning of the war in 1939. Scheil put forward his thesis of an equal responsibility of five European powers without original archive research. He ignored the recognized research results, according to which, despite the joint responsibility of other states, “Hitler's irrepressible will to go to war” was the factor that triggered the war. Scheil's “escalation model” was constructed, contradicting itself and required certain facts to be reinterpreted: He ignored or played down the racist ideology of the Nazi regime. He also fails to recognize that Hitler's supposedly “moderate demands” on Poland were part of a “perfidious tactic”. The German occupation of Poland 1939–1945 had shown Hitler's true war goals, namely that he was striving for a “pax germanica” with war as a future European “model of order” and considered the annihilation of all “racial enemies” to be essential. Scheil is either a late victim of the Nazi propaganda of the time or - more likely - "one of those difficult to teach who exculpate Hitler and his accomplices and want to pay off some of the oppressive mortgage of the Germans after 1945". Also Heinz Hürten (2004) criticized Scheils theses in Five plus Two insufficient evidence as designed, partially apologetic and especially with sources. Klaus Jochen Arnold judged Scheil's work Fünf plus Zwei in 2003 to be a consistent reinterpretation of the prehistory of the Second World War, which revised almost all of the research on it. He agreed with Scheil that Hitler and Stalin had "unleashed" the Second World War together. But it is “exaggerated” that Scheil portrays Hitler as a “normal” foreign politician who in 1939 only took action against Poland because of Danzig . According to Scheil, it is questionable whether Poland was responsible for the outbreak of war and Great Britain for the expansion into the war. Scheil's mostly plausible arguments, however, deserve “to be discussed in detail and verified.” Christian Oswald sharply rejected this: By stating that Scheil took Hitler's war justifications literally, he indirectly accused his book of “Nazi propaganda”. In 2004, Scheil wrote that, with regard to five plus two , there was a "danger of being exposed to Nazi propaganda sixty years after the end of the war and of having written a Hitler apology at the end". The military history magazine of the MGFA reacted by pointing out that Scheil had not taken into account the objections of historians such as Heinz Hürten: "It will hardly be possible to confirm to the author that the knowledge of these dangers would have already resulted in overcoming them."

Ribbentrop biography

Ulrich Schlie attested in 2013 Scheil's Ribbentrop biography that she drew “from a profound knowledge of sources and literature”, but criticized that she “repeatedly mixed up with untenable assumptions about the constellation of states and the structure of National Socialist foreign policy and tended to be revisionist”. be. In individual points, the study leads to findings that enrich the state of research. Scheil had succeeded in proving that the assumption made in the study The Office and the Past that the extermination of the Jews was discussed on September 17, 1941 at a meeting between Hitler and Ribbentrop, was not tenable. Wolfgang Michalka also attested that Scheil had a good knowledge of the sources, but "he only considers and cites what corresponds to his understanding of history", which leads to "distortions of the files and grotesque distortions of their interpretation". In the Historical Journal -reviewed Lothar Kettenacker , in the book "the whole spectrum of nationalist'll Geschichtsklitterung fanned". Apart from the “right-wing revisionism”, the biography is also “unprofessional”. No clear structure, chronology and stringency of the presentation can be recognized and is cited on a questionable basis. Scheil then wrote an open letter .

More reviews

In 2006, Rolf-Dieter Müller reviewed Scheil's books on World War II, published in 2003 and 2005: Scheil appeared as a “revisionist”, according to whose view “the history of the Second World War had to be largely rewritten”. It was precisely this epoch that was "analyzed closely and in detail". Scheil opened his first book with the "thesis of an allegedly manipulated Nuremberg verdict on the German war guilt", presented the results of the Second World War as a "mere German defeat" and Hitler always only as a "pawn in the calculation of the larger, more powerful". Following Gerd Schultze-Rhonhof, he tried to prove that “Germany was merely the victim of a conspiracy in 1939 , instigated by chauvinist Poles, power-hungry French, British and Americans, and a sinister Stalin .” This line continues his second book. Müller asked: "But can we really ignore the fact that Hitler wanted, instigated and fought this war as a struggle for 'living space'?" Scheil also polemicizes against Andreas Hillgruber , who set standards for research into the Second World War. He distances himself from almost all historical research based on Hillgruber. In his “source review” (Müller: “a treacherous choice of words”) he only selected historical events and quotations that supported his thesis. Contrary to his claim to have scientifically "torn apart" a lot of university research, he did not deal with the state of research and did not classify his diplomacy history in it. Aside from the expected sales success, his book could be viewed as “startling fictional entertainment”. Informed readers, however, would recognize the origin of his mind-structure:

"It can be found in the arguments with which Hitler publicly justified the attack on the Soviet Union on June 22, 1941."

In 2006, Manfred Zeidler criticized the 1940/41 work - the escalation of the Second World War : Scheil had neglected the fact that Hitler planned and waged the war of aggression on the Soviet Union as a war of annihilation . In his book Weser Exercise against Operation Stratford , Scheil explicitly names Zeidler's criticism in the foreword and takes a position on it.

Scheil finds approval from national conservative and right-wing extremist authors. In 2005 he received the “Gerhard Löwenthal Prize for Journalism ” donated by the newspaper “ Junge Freiheit ”, Ingeborg Löwenthal and the Conservative Education and Research Foundation (FKBF) . In his laudation on Scheil, the Viennese historian Lothar Höbelt emphasized that Scheil's “special merit” was that he had delivered a “very precisely argued blow” against the popular image of the origins of the Second World War, that of “megalomania with the wrong sign. .. in terms of analytical content actually differs only insignificantly from Goebbels' propaganda ”. In 2009, Gerhard Frey defended Scheil's revisionist stance in the National-Zeitung .

Awards

  • 2005: Gerhard Löwenthal Prize (laudation by Lothar Höbelt )
  • 2014: Historians Prize of the Erich and Erna Kronauer Foundation (in absentia read laudatory speech by Ernst Nolte ). Before it was awarded, Oliver Bruckmann, dean of the Evangelical Lutheran Church, protested against the participation of the city of Schweinfurt. Scheil, according to Bruckmann, “presents his theses and convictions on the genesis and responsibility history of the Second World War in an exaggerated and absolute manner, also in the context of the corresponding media, which are suitable to serve as stirrups for right-wing radicalism and to promote anti-Europeanism . "

Publications

  • The development of political anti-Semitism in Germany between 1881 and 1912. An investigation into the history of elections. Duncker & Humblot , Berlin 1999, ISBN 3-428-09483-2 .
  • Logic of powers. Europe's problem with the globalization of politics. Reflections on the prehistory of the Second World War. Duncker & Humblot, Berlin 1999, ISBN 3-428-09551-0 .
  • Five plus two. The European nation states, the world powers and the unleashing of the Second World War. 4th edition. Duncker & Humblot, Berlin 2009, ISBN 978-3-428-11638-6 .
  • Legends, rumors, misjudgments. A commentary on the 2nd edition of the Wehrmacht exhibition. Leopold Stocker Verlag , Graz 2003, ISBN 3-902475-11-0 .
  • 1940/41. The escalation of World War II. Olzog Verlag, Munich 2005. (second, reviewed and supplemented edition: The escalation of the Second World War from 1940 to the Barbarossa company in 1941. Duncker & Humblot, Berlin 2011, ISBN 978-3-428-13377-2 )
  • Revisionism and Democracy. Edition Antaios , Schnellroda 2008, ISBN 978-3-935063-82-1 .
  • Churchill, Hitler and anti-Semitism. The German dictatorship, its political opponents and the European crisis of 1938/39. Duncker & Humblot, Berlin 2008, 2nd revised and supplemented edition. 2009, ISBN 978-3-428-12846-4 .
  • Preventive War Barbarossa. Questions, facts, answers. Edition Antaios, ISBN 978-3-935063-96-8 .
  • Transatlantic interactions: The change of elites in Germany after 1945. Duncker & Humblot, Berlin 2012, ISBN 978-3-428-13572-1 .
  • Ribbentrop - Or: The Lure of National Awakening - a political biography. Duncker & Humblot, Berlin 2013, ISBN 978-3-428-13907-1 .
  • Poland 1939 - war calculation, preparation, execution. Edition Antaios, Schnellroda 2013, ISBN 978-3-944422-37-4 .
  • In the midst of peace we are attacked by the enemy. Forgotten Truths of World War I - The Guilt of the Victors in the Debates of the Twenties. Landt-Verlag, Berlin 2014, ISBN 978-3-944872-05-6 .
  • Weser exercise against Operation Stratford - How the Allies carried the war to Scandinavia in 1940. Edition Antaios, Schnellroda 2015, ISBN 978-3-944422-44-2 .
  • 707th Infantry Division: Law enforcement, research and polemics about an armed forces association in Belarus , Helios Verlag, Aachen 2016, ISBN 978-3-86933-156-0
  • The brazen forgery - The French Yellow Book and the Causes of War of 1914 , Edition Antaios, Schnellroda 2018, ISBN 978-3-944422-81-7 .
  • The German Reichskleinodien from 1796-1946 - Sketches of an Odyssey , in: Dieter Stein (Hrsg.): Festschrift for Karlheinz Weißmann for his sixtieth birthday , Junge Freiheit Verlag: Berlin 2019, ISBN 978-3-929886-69-6 .

Web links

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ Stefan Scheil: The Development of Political Anti-Semitism in Germany between 1881 and 1912 . 1999, p. 8; Michael Dreyer: Stefan Scheil: The development of political anti-Semitism in Germany between 1881 and 1912. Berlin: 1999 (review). Political Science Portal , January 1, 2006.
  2. ^ Archives of the "Junge Freiheit" (oldest archived article by Scheil from 2002)
  3. ↑ Stefan Scheil: Friday column of "Junge Freiheit" (oldest contribution: May 1, 2009)
  4. ^ Secession: Stefan Scheil ( Memento from August 16, 2011 in the Internet Archive )
  5. ^ Armin Pfahl-Traughber: Right-wing extremism in the Federal Republic , CH Beck, 3rd edition. Munich 2001, p. 46; Die Welt, February 15, 2009: Between extremism and democracy: New Right is German national and anti-Western
  6. ↑ Classification as right-wing extremist: Verfassungsschutzbericht Baden-Württemberg 2006, p. 179.
  7. ^ Event archive of the right-wing extremist Regin-Verlag. Retrieved January 30, 2010 ( memento of September 8, 2012 in the web archive archive.today ); Classification of Muniers as a right-wing extremist: Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution: Annual Report 2009, p. 120f. (pdf; 4.3 MB) ( Memento from December 24, 2012 in the Internet Archive )
  8. ↑ Druffel & Vowinckel: Publishing house advertising ; Anton Maegerle : Political and journalistic career of authors of the "Junge Freiheit". In: Stephan Braun , Ute Vogt (ed.): The weekly newspaper Junge Freiheit. Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, Wiesbaden 2007, p. 206.
  9. ^ Council and citizen information system of the Rhein-Pfalz-Kreis: List of elected officials .
  10. ↑ Alternative for Germany - District Association Rhein-Pfalz: Board of Directors and contact person .
  11. ^ Eisenberg "We are the only real opposition" , Die Rheinpfalz September 16, 2017
  12. ↑ Results Kaiserslautern , Federal Returning Officer, accessed on October 1, 2017
  13. ↑ Stefan Scheil: Of raids and preventive wars. In: ders .: Revisionism and Democracy. Edition Antaios, Schnellroda 2008, pp. 61–76 (62)
  14. ↑ Stefan Scheil: Stalin's Man in the World ( Memento from August 13, 2011 in the Internet Archive ) . In: Secession on the Net , June 8, 2011.
  15. ^ Rolf-Dieter Müller, Hans-Erich Volkmann: The Wehrmacht: Myth and Reality. Oldenbourg, Munich 2012, ISBN 978-3-486-59207-8 , p. 13 ; Jürgen Förster: The Wehrmacht in the Nazi state: a structural-historical analysis. Oldenbourg, 2009, ISBN 3-486-59171-1 , p. 57ff .; Johannes Hürter: Hitler's Army Leader - The German Supreme Commanders in the War against the Soviet Union 1941/42. Oldenbourg, Munich 2007, ISBN 3-486-58341-7 , pp. 205-265 and 509-559; Jochen Böhler: Prelude to the War of Extermination: The Wehrmacht in Poland in 1939. Fischer, Frankfurt am Main 2006, ISBN 3-596-16307-2 , p. 29f .; Dieter Pohl: The cooperation between the army, SS and police in the occupied Soviet territories. In: Christian Hartmann, Johannes Hürter, Ulrike Jureit , Jan Philipp Reemtsma (ed.): Crimes of the Wehrmacht: Balance of a Debate. Beck, Munich 2005, ISBN 978-3-406-52802-6 , pp. 107-116
  16. ↑ Jost Dülffer: Review of Stefan Scheil, Logic of the Powers , in: Historische Zeitschrift 271 (August 2000), issue 1, pp. 258–260
  17. ↑ Wolfgang Benz: Historical politics of the "New Right": Revisionism contra historical truth. Notes from current events . In: Journal of History. Issue 10/2014, pp. 785–801, here pp. 785–787.
  18. ↑ Wolfgang Benz: Historical politics of the "New Right": Revisionism contra historical truth. Current notes , p. 796.
  19. ^ Sven Felix Kellerhoff ( Die Welt , September 26, 2006): Not a completely normal campaign
  20. ^ Sven Kellerhoff ( Die Welt , September 1, 2009): "Poland is waiting, almost fatalistic"
  21. ↑ Rainer F. Schmidt: O shock: a blank check! Stefan Scheil's steep theses on the prehistory of the Second World War. In: Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung of June 4, 2009, p. 7.
  22. ↑ Sergej Slutsch: The motifs for Molotov's invitation to Berlin. In: Klaus Hildebrand, Udo Wengst and Andreas Wirsching (eds.): History and knowledge of time. From Enlightenment to the Present. Festschrift for the 65th birthday of Horst Möller , Oldenbourg, Munich 2008, p. 255 and footnote 11; P. 271 and footnote 93; P. 276 and footnote 111
  23. ↑ Hans Fenske (FAZ, September 23, 1999, p. 12): Good luck with three percent. On the political anti-Semitism of the imperial era
  24. ↑ Massimo Ferrari Zumbini: The Roots of Evil: Founding Years of Anti-Semitism: From the Bismarckian Period to Hitler , Klostermann, 2003, ISBN 3-465-03222-5 , p. 580 ( online excerpt )
  25. ↑ Peter GJ Pulzer: The emergence of political anti-Semitism in Germany and Austria 1867-1914. With a research report by the author. Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Göttingen 2004, ISBN 3-525-36954-9 , p. 20 ( online excerpt )
  26. ↑ Matthias Piefel: anti-Semitism and racial movement in the Kingdom of Saxony 1879-1914 , V & R Unipress, 2004, ISBN 3-89971-187-4 , p 14 ( excerpt online )
  27. ↑ Hans-Adolf Jacobsen (FAZ, August 8, 2003, p. 6): Five plus two equals zero - Did Europe slide into the Second World War in 1939?
  28. ↑ Heinz Hürten: Review of Stefan Scheil, Five plus Two. In: Military History Journal 63 (2004), Issue 1, pp. 231–233.
  29. ↑ Klaus Jochen Arnold: Review for H-Soz-u-Kult (February 3, 2004)
  30. ↑ Christian Oswald, answer to Arnold's review for H-Soz-Kult, February 5, 2004
  31. ^ Stefan Scheil: Five plus two , 4th edition, Berlin 2009, p. 110.
  32. ↑ Military History Journal 63 (2004) p. 233.
  33. ^ Ulrich Schlie: Stefan Scheil: Ribbentrop. Paladin with the magic lamp? In: Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung. June 3, 2013, p. 8 u. Online edition faz.net, June 2, 2013.
  34. ↑ Wolfgang Michalka: Review of: Ribbentrop. Or: the lure of political awakening. A political biography . Berlin 2013, in: H-Soz-Kult, December 3, 2013
  35. ^ Lothar Kettenacker: Stefan Scheil, Ribbentrop. Or: the lure of the national awakening. A political biography. Berlin, Duncker & Humblot 2013. In: Historical magazine. Vol. 299 (2014), pp. 852-854.
  36. ↑ www.symposion.org/Kettenacker.htm
  37. ^ Rolf-Dieter Müller: "Adolf the Peace-loving." In: Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung of June 22, 2006, p. 9.
  38. ^ Manfred Zeidler: Scheil, Stefan: 1940/41. The escalation of World War II . In: Totalitarianism and Democracy . Journal for international dictatorship and freedom research , 3.2 (2006), pp. 392–402.
  39. ↑ Lothar Höbelt: Emancipation from discourse . In: Junge Freiheit 49/05, December 2, 2005.
  40. ↑ Press release of June 24, 2009: National newspaper: Revisionism as sin. ( Memento from September 27, 2013 in the Internet Archive )
  41. ↑ Oliver Bruckmann: Press release from September 24, 2014
personal data
SURNAME Scheil, Stefan
BRIEF DESCRIPTION German historian
DATE OF BIRTH 1963
PLACE OF BIRTH Mannheim