United Patriotic Associations of Germany

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

United Patriotic Associations of Germany (VVVD) was the name of an amalgamation of various right-wing organizations at the time of the Weimar Republic .

prehistory

In the German Reich in the first years of the Weimar Republic there were numerous right-wing paramilitary associations, combat leagues and camouflaged successors to the Freikorps that had formed after the November Revolution in 1918. Efforts were made at an early stage to unite the divided and fragmented organizations. In 1921 a working committee of German associations was founded, which according to its own information comprised 600 sub-organizations. However, this merger was short-lived.

In Bavaria already formed in 1922 under the patronage Erich Ludendorff the United Patriotic Associations of Bavaria , which in the same year, inspired by Benito Mussolini's march on Rome , a march on Berlin planned. Gustav von Kahr , a supporter of the association, became State Commissioner General. In the run-up to the Hitler coup of 1923, Kahr hesitated to join the cause and was forced by Hitler to participate. Kahr soon revoked this, which ultimately contributed to the suppression of the coup.

founding

Fritz Geisler headed the organization until 1925

It was this Bavarian model that also promoted the efforts to establish a union at the national level. The preparations for this were completed in December 1922.

On January 20, 1923, 140 "national associations" and associations of former officers had officially merged to form the United Patriotic Associations of Germany. Most of the associations previously belonged to three organizations, namely the Central Office of Patriotic Associations, the Working Group on Patriotic Enlightenment and the National United Front.

The central office was founded in 1917 and comprised 50 individual organizations. The working group consisted of 20 subgroups. The united front was an offshoot of the Volksbund against Bolshevism and had 100,000 members.

The VVVD stood in the tradition of legal associations of the German Empire and the German Fatherland Party of the war years.

It was a loose alliance of organizations with very different goals. These included militarist , ethnic , anti-Marxist and anti-Semitic groups. Some strove to restore the monarchy, others saw their goal in a legal dictatorship.

development

The VVVD was headed by a presidium made up of the heads of the three founding associations. Fritz Geisler , a leading representative of the yellow trade unions , exercised the actual leadership.

In its founding year, the occupation of the Ruhr was initially at the center of the association's activities. Meetings were held, resolutions were made, and demonstrations were organized. The social democratic organizations were identified as alleged defeatists . Therefore the association created its own anti-Marxist propaganda group. In addition, black lists were drawn up of people who worked with the occupiers and who also set up remote courts. At that time, the association demanded a military dictatorship under Hans von Seeckt .

The association had not participated in the Hitler putsch of 1923 at the Reich level and was therefore not affected by a ban. In 1924 in particular, he filled the gap as the mouthpiece of the radical right that had emerged from the ban on the NSDAP .

In 1924/25 the VVVD tried above all to join the armed forces and the ethnic parties.

The goals of the United Associations were accordingly broad. This naturally included the revision of the Versailles Peace Treaty in favor of Germany. It called for armament, a return to the pre-war borders and the return of the colonies . Domestically, they wanted to reinstate the constitution of the empire . The Marxism and the Jewish spirit should be fought. One dreamed of a Greater Germany on a ethnic and social basis through the connection of foreign areas with German minorities .

During the election campaign in May 1924 , the association sought a right-wing bloc. This should include the DNVP , ethnic groups and the right wing of the DVP . The parties were urged to draw up election lists made up of ethnic and national candidates. If the parties did not comply with these terms, the association withdrew their support. This pattern was also followed in the following years.

Although the DNVP was quite open to the demands of the association, it did not always follow them in concrete policy. While the VVVD vehemently rejected the Dawes Plan , the DNVP agreed to it. In 1925 they initially proposed General von Seeckt as a candidate from the national camp for the office of Reich President, but were unsuccessful because the right-wing parties nominated Karl Jarres . The VVVD also reluctantly swung in to Jarres. After the right-wing parties sent Paul von Hindenburg into the race in the second ballot , the VVVD initially rejected this because they assumed that the republic's reputation could grow if Hindenburg were elected. Ultimately, however, there was nothing left but to stand behind Hindenburg.

The VVVD were a staunch opponent of Gustav Stresemann's foreign policy understanding policy . With other right-wing groups they formed an action alliance to prevent the ratification of the Locarno Treaties . However, it did not succeed in creating a really closed legal alliance.

Rüdiger von der Goltz took over the management in 1925 (photo from 1918)

Nor did it succeed in gaining the undisputed leadership role in the extreme right-wing camp. There was considerable internal tension, which broke out openly in 1925. It was a power struggle between President Geisler and the leader of the military wing of the association Rüdiger von der Goltz , a former free corps leader in the Baltic States. Although both were politically close to the DNVP, they had different positions towards the ethnic groups. Unlike von der Goltz, Geisler had little sympathy for them. This also wanted to give the military forces a broader space, also by including paramilitary mass organizations. Geisler rejected the militarization of the association and wanted above all to win over the workers for the "national cause". In this respect, the power struggle was also about the future direction of the association. Von der Goltz prevailed.

Von der Goltz did not succeed, as hoped, in bringing about a collaboration between the VVVD, which is more closely related to DNVP, and the völkisch parties. Likewise, it was not possible to bring the large paramilitary groups to the association. There were even violent disputes with the Young German Order , some of which were fought in court. Theodor Duesterberg was a member of the Presidium, but not in his capacity as the leading person of the Stahlhelm . The Wiking Bund under Hermann Ehrhardt joined, but was no longer of any importance.

Contrary to what was thought, the VVVD did not take on the leading role of the “national opposition”, but since 1926/27 this has been with the Stahlhelm. In 1929 the influence of the association had sunk so much that it was even considered to dissolve the organization.

Overall, the goals were too diffuse and contradictory for the association to play a really strong political role. Then there was the notorious selfishness of the member organizations.

Nevertheless, the VVVD continued to play a certain role in the right spectrum. They were one of the groups that supported the campaign against the Young Plan in 1929. Politically, the VVVD supported the DNVP and the NSDAP. You participated in the Harzburg Front in 1931 and campaigned for Adolf Hitler in the 1932 presidential election .

After the beginning of the National Socialist rule , the VVVD were dissolved.

literature

Web links

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ Eberhard Kolb: The Weimar Republic . Munich 2002, p. 55.
  2. ↑ James M. Diehl: From the Fatherland Party to the National Revolution . P. 620.
  3. ↑ James M. Diehl: From the Fatherland Party to the National Revolution . P. 621.
  4. ↑ James M. Diehl: From the Fatherland Party to the National Revolution . P. 623.
  5. ↑ James M. Diehl: From the Fatherland Party to the National Revolution . P. 625.
  6. ↑ James M. Diehl: From the Fatherland Party to the National Revolution . P. 628.
  7. ↑ James M. Diehl: From the Fatherland Party to the National Revolution . P. 629.
  8. ↑ James M. Diehl: From the Fatherland Party to the National Revolution . P. 631f.
  9. ↑ James M. Diehl: From the Fatherland Party to the National Revolution . P. 633f.
  10. ↑ James M. Diehl: From the Fatherland Party to the National Revolution . P. 634.