Der Ewige Jude 3p1j

:3

---

~

= =-~- = w o ~

r ~ 0

~OE.

~I)

Z

a | 1 7 6 a''' ~

..c

(])

~s

~"

I ~: w

a._o O l - ~.~w~

e4

ed by [Harvard College] at 14:52 15 September 2011

Der ewige Jude

45

sight to StoU as well. Stoll, as well as Hans Eberhard Winterfeld~ Robert Hartmann, Albert Endrejat, Anton Hafner and Friedrich Carl Heere were experienced, professional newsreel cameramen. Hans-Dieter Schiller normally served as film editor for the official newsreel, Die deutsche Wochenschau; he made the first three rough cuts of DeJ before being sent to during the summer of 1940. Albert Baumeister, having earlier edited Hippler's Feldzug in Polen, the official film of the Polish campaigu~ did the final editing for DeJ. Svend Noldan made the maps and the animation inserts. Franz Friedl, a freelance composer who had provided music for a number of newsreels and Tendenz films, provided a score of 'Jewish-like' music. Hippler had a musicologist check to ensure the score suggested the spirit of 12 tone music without actually being so. The filmclips in DeJ came from the Reichsfilmarchiv, which had created a catalog of 'possible' footage to be used in a anti-Semitic film. Dr Walter Scheunemann, from the DFG (German Film Society), was in charge of post-production, including recording the commentary. The narrator, Harry Giese, was one of two 'official' voices for the

Wochenschau. DeJ was cut and re-cut a number of times before a final version was released in November 1940. Two important contemporary s from the spring of 1940 allow us to know more about how this film developed. Der deutsche Film was published by the cultural-political department of film for the NSDAP. Erwin G61z, writing under the psuedonym 'Frank Maraun', published an article about DeJ, offering detailed comments, and 26 frame enlargements. From this article, which describes careful testscreenings before selected audiences, we can learn much about the film as it existed in early 1940. The Jewish sequences were mostly in final form. But the comparison between Aryans and Jews which forms an important part of the release print was lacking. Already present was the notorious comparison between Jews and rats at the beginning and the ritual slaughter scenes at the end. But there is not a single reference to Hitler's anti-Jewish speech so often cited in references to the film after it was released. The February 1940 version contained a long wedding-party sequence from the Yiddish feature-film Yidl mit'n Fidl, along with sequences from feature films with Jewish stars Siegfried Arno, Kurt Gerron and Fritz Grfinbaum. Twenty of the published frame enlargements appear in the release print [ 11 ]. The film was just about ready for final release, and then suddenly it was not. On 9 January 1940, Goebbels noted in his diary: 'Jewish film in its final cut. I think we have got it now.' Three days later, a different conclusion: 'I must rework the Jewish film once again.' It appears that Goebbels' obsessive perfectionism explains the delay. The intense work on the film between October and January then turned to measured progress. Finally, on 4 April, the film was again ready to be shown to the Ffihrer. Meanwhile, Hans Hinkel, one of the Propaganda Ministry's experts on antiSemitism~ arranged for a very elaborate test screening of DeJ on 1 March 1940, before an audience of 120. We know that by this time the film's comparison between Aryans and Jews was present, as well as the speech by Hitler attacking Jews. But the sequence on Jewish art was not yet in place. Everyone applauded the ritual slaughter scenes, but someone felt the 'cultural coherence of Jewish slaughter' should be made more coherent. Reichsamtsleiter Brack from the chancellery felt the choral singing in the Synagogue scenes seemed too close to Roman Catholic service music, which could lead Catholics to a 'wrong attitude.' Professor Dr Havemann felt there was 'not enough time for the common people to think about things in some of the cruder sequences.' Professor yon Kursell from the Staatliche Kunsthochschule proposed an ending with

46

S. Hornshfij-Mr

& D. Culbert

'more beautiful nordic figures.' Various representatives of the military and the


Reichsarbeitsdienst lobbied to have 'their' men not shown in close juxtaposition to 'Jewish' faces in the film. The next day, 2 March Hinkel sent these comments to Hippler, adding: 'Please tell me what else our boss needs' [12]. Release of the film dragged on and on. Not April, but 2 September 1940, marked the completion of the film. At a secret conference the next day at the Propaganda Ministry, Leopold Gutterer was told to arrange a private screening for Sunday, 8 September, at 11.30 a.m. at the Ufa-Palast-am-Zoo for cabinet ministers, party , representatives of the military, the foreign press, selected university professors, and representatives of the Hitler Youth and women's organizations. This screening produced strong reactions. Several insisted that the film was suitable only for persons with strong stomachs. Others argued that this film should only be shown at closed party meetings. As a result, Goebbels agreed to a shorter, milder version, one without the slaughter scenes. This was finished 10 October. The next day Goebbels noted in his diary: 'The Eternal Jew is finally finished. Now we can let him out' [13]. Formal approval by the censor took place in Berlin on 4 November. Both versions of the film were judged 'politically and artistically valuable.' The shorter version was termed officially 'worthy of youth.' Both versions were officially suitable for Sunday screenings, as well as on Good Friday and other national holidays. In the next few weeks sufficient prints were made to allow simultaneous screening of the film all over . What explains so many production delays? Peter Bucher notes the close connection between Deft and two anti-Semitic feature films, released in 1940, The Rothschilds and Jew Siiss. The former was a box-office failure, but this does not mean Goebbels was forced to wait until Jew Siiss proved itself at the box-office before introducing another anti-Semitic film. Goebbels was also a perfectionist, willing to take into each test screening viewer's suggestions. And creating two official versions simply took a good bit of production time. One can also presume that the frantic pace of Nazi military victories in May and June 1940 provided extra work for Hippler, in overall charge of the newsreels. It was during this period that all newsreels were reorganized as Die deutsche Wochenschau. The author of the film's narration, Dr Eberhard Tanbert, was sent to Oslo on 9 April to organize propaganda activities. One must conclude that the production history of Deft suggests that no matter how virulent, it was but one of many propaganda film projects competing for attention by persons with many projects underway simultaneously. It is worth ing that Deft's premiere was also delayed by the decision to produce two versions, the shorter requiring some new transitional sequences. The P r e m i e r e

The premiere took place at the Ufa Palast-am-Zoo theater in Berlin on Thursday, 28 November 1940 with two screenings. For children and women, the less-horrifying shorter version; the full version was screened at 6.30 p.m. Fritz Hippler and his cameramen were on hand, as were many prominent leaders from the Party and the military. Strangely enough, Goebbels found a reason to be in Oslo. First came a cultural short, Ostraum--deutscher Raum (The East--German Territory) which always preceded screenings of Deft, and was meant to balance the main attraction [14]. One sees noteworthy German architecture and art, after which the

Der ewige Jude

47


narrator concludes: "Through German spirit and diligence, through German power and work, the East became German territory." If Ostraum failed to meet objective criteria for artistic excellence, it underscored the need to promote an expansionist German cultural presence in Poland. Then followed the latest newsreel, and then the radio orchestra played Beethoven's Egmont overture. The main feature, DeJ, resulted in 'tremendous applause', according to the press report in the V~lkischer Beobachter. As with all feature films of the day, one could purchase an illustrated program, the Illustrierte Film-Kurier, with a summary: The film begins with an impressive expedition through the Jewish ghettoes in Poland. We are shown Jewish living quarters, which in our view cannot be called houses. In these dirty rooms lives and prays a race, which earns its living not by work but by haggling and swindling. From the little urchin to the old man, they stand in the streets, trading and bargaining. Using trick photography, we are shown how the Jewish racial mixture in Asia Minor developed and flooded the entire world. We see a parallel to this in the itinerant routes of rats, which are the parasites and bacillus-carriers among animals, just as the Jews occupy the same position among mankind. The Jew has always known how to assimilate his external appearance to that of his host. Contrasted are the same Jewish types, first the Eastern Jew with his kaftan, beard, and sideburns, and then the clean-shaven, Western European Jew. This strikingly demonstrates how he has deceived the Aryan people. Under this mask he increased his influence more and more in Aryan nations and climbed to higher-ranking positions. But he could not change his inner being. After the banishment of the Jews from Europe was lifted, following the age of Enlightment, the Jew succeeded within the course of several decades in dominating the world economy, before the various host nations realized--and this despite the fact that they made up only 1 per cent of the world population. An excerpt from an American film about the Rothschilds, made by Jews, reveals to us the cunning foundations of their banking empire. Then we see how Jews, working for their international finance, drive the German people into the November Revolution. They then shed their anonymity and step out openly on to the stage of political and cultural life. Thus the men who were responsible for the disgraceful debasement of the German people are paraded before us. Incontestable examples are shown of how they robbed the country and the people of immense sums. As well as gaining financial supremacy they were able to dominate cultural life. The repulsive pictures of so-called Jewish 'art' reveal the complete decline of cultural life at that time. Using original sequences from contemporary films, the degrading and destructive tendency of Jewish power is exposed. For hundreds of years German artists have glorified figures from the Old Testament, knowing full well the real face of Jewry. How the Jew actually looks is shown in scenes shot by Jews themselves in a 'culture film' of a Purim festival, which is still celebrated today to commemorate the slaughter of 75,000 anti-Semitic Persians, and the doctrine with which future Rabbis in Jewish schools are educated to be political pedagogues. We look into a Jewish 'Talmud' class and experience the oriental tone of the ceremony in a Jewish synagogue, where Jews conduct business deals among themselves during the holy services.

48

S. Hornsh~j-Mdller & D. Culbert However, the cruel face of Judaism is most brutally displayed in the final scenes, in which original shots of a kosher butchering are revealed. These film documents of the inhuman slaughter of cattle and sheep without anaesthesia provide conclusive evidence of a brutality which is simply inconceivable to all Aryan people. In shining contrast, the film closes with pictures of German people and German order which fill the viewer with a feeling of deep gratification for belonging to a race whose Fiihrer is fundamentally solving the Jewish problem. [15]


The Intended Response An official publicity-campaign accompanied the release of the film, marred only by a slight problem of nomenclature: it was officially forbidden to describe a film as 'antiSemitic'. This of course proved no lasting problem in a controlled press where one's approach to every story was dictated in advance. Most newspapers published large pieces about the film in their regular news section, and film magazines described nationwide screenings. The Institute for the Study of the Jewish Question published a special issue of its official organ, Die Judenfrage. Fritz Hippler gave a radio interview, surely similar to versions published in D/e Judenfrage, and other film periodicals [16]. He insisted that the 'unbelievable boxoffice success' of Jew Si~ss showed a 'major interest in such films about the Jewish Question in spite of all earlier expressed doubts'. He described a fundamental difference between feature films and a documentary about the Jewish question. DeJ, he claimed, was a 'supplement' to feature films, which lack the 'spontaneity of reality'. Jew Si~ss used Aryan actors to simulate the actions of Jews. Hippler made special claims for authenticity: No Jew was forced into any kind of action or position during the shooting. Moreover, we let the filmed Jews be on their own and tried to shoot in moments when they were unaware of the camera's presence. Consequently we have rendered the Ghetto Jews in an unprejudiced manner, real to life as they live and as they react in their own surroundings. All who see this film will be convinced there is never a forced or scared expression in the faces of the Jews who are filmed ing by, trading or attending ritual services. From time to time one sees a certain smugness. [17] Hippler's statements, slightly changed, were summarized in 'canned' reviews throughout . But as Peter Bucher notes, it is significant that Goebbels' own journal, Das Reich totally ignored the film, as did such Nazi magazines as the Nationalsozialistische Monatsheften, as well as the Frankfurter Zeitung [18]. The publicity campaign made explicit the connection between the Jewish question and an ongoing war.

Distribution and Actual Reception If intended response is easy to gauge from the film's contents and its treatment by a controlled press, it is just the opposite when one turns to actual reception. This question is particularly important in discussing such a notorious film, particularly as so many have used this film to prove the average German's for the Final Solution. The actual record of initial response, while by no means complete, suggests

Der ewige Jude

49


how simplistic it is to argue that the virulent message of DeJ represents the attitudes of the typical German in 1940. After 1938, it has been asserted, no cinema owner in dared deny the booking of a film which received the proper sort of rating from the Nazi propaganda hierarchy (the so-called Priidikate). The distribution of DeJ disproves this assertion. More curious, given the idea of this film as the ultimate statement of state-directed anti-Semitism, is its failure to receive more than the second-best rating. This meant it was free of the normal entertainment tax and inexpensive to rent, and was distributed through the Gaufilmstellen, owned by the Nazi Party. The Ministry of Propaganda, in a surviving letter to cinema owners in Hessen-Nassau, noted the value of special youth screenings: Youth attending schools will not see this film in school-groups. Instead they will see it as Hitler-Jugend in special Filmfeierstunden organized by the local HJ-groups. Each HJ-group will be informed directly and asked to communicate with the cinema owners to find a date for such a screening. [19] These screenings usually took place on Sunday, and included group singing plus 'enlightening' lectures. The SD (Security Police) reported such meetings as effective in small towns, and useful in creating enthusiasm for those soon to enter uniform as soldiers. The film was shown to of the military; two prints were sent to Luxembourg; two were sent to Cracow, on 22 February 1941. Two prints now in the Danish Filmmuseum came from a wartime German military camp in Denmark. The film was shown in Lodz (renamed Litzmannstadt) in early 1941. But no systematic records survive as to how many persons in youth groups saw the film, nor is there evidence of this film's total distribution within the military [20]. Commercial distribution within was disappointing. The Berlin premiere, 28 November, was the start of the sort of run which has a simple description: flop. Peter Bucher checked actual screenings for Berlin, as listed in the VM~'scher Beobachter, with published reports claiming 66 theaters in Greater Berlin the first week; 30 more, the week after. The actual results for a city where the Jewish issue was particularly salient are instructive: 29 November 1940--36 cinemas; 3 December--20; 6 December--18; 10 December--15; 13 December--1 [21]. Mind you, such a film seems a singular addition to family celebrations for Christmas. The euphoria Nazis felt about 's domination of Europe in December 1940 can scarcely have suggested the need to attack the Jewish influence allegedly holding back German greatness. Our best estimate suggests that no more than one million persons paid to see the film, and hence Goebbels quickly turned to non-commercial distribution. Secret SD reports provide additional evidence as to what German viewers thought of the film. In several towns 'only the politically-active sector' saw the film; the 'typical' film-going audience stayed away. There was 'word-of-mouth propaganda' against the film and its 'realistic' way of presenting material. Attendance fell, sometimes 'very quickly' in northwestern , southwestern , and in Austria. I f we deduct those who essentially were obliged to attend or be seen attending the film, there was audience interest only where one had earlier seen orthodox Judaism, such as Berlin and the East. The SD reports noted specific complaints about the full-length version: 'the loathing of the subject itself and the slaughter-scenes' led to an 'exceptional "strain on the nerves" '. That this film followed the enormous success of the antiSemitic feature film Jew Siiss led others to consider 'new, even more extreme documentation' of the Jewish problem 'not necessary'.


50

S. HornsheJj-MeJller & D. Culbert

SD reports indicate that the film seemed effective to confirmed Nazis, who considered it a 'most impressive document', and 'more enlightening, convincing and impressive than many anti-Jewish writings.' Ardent anti-Semites liked what they saw, but others, even enthusiastic Nazis, had quite different responses. In western but also in Breslau, 'single spectators often left the cinemas in a disgusted mood'. The comment suggests that more than a 'few persons' held such views. When the SD reported comments such as 'We have seen Jew S~ss and we have seen enough of this Jewish filth!', it seems clear that DeJ was failing to achieve its objective [22]. Friedrich Knilli has argued that Jew Siiss offers a mixture of 'sex and crime to the unpolitical viewer', which is important in understanding its box-office appeal. It has dramatic values and first-rate stars which make it a film which offers far more than vitriolic anti-Semitism. On the other hand, DeJ hammers away relentlessly on antiSemitism, something an unpolitical viewer would find objectionable, to say nothing of those who simply did not hold such extreme views. Marlis Steinert, among others, has analyzed the attitude of the German people during War War II, and concludes that in assessing popular for Hitler, 'anti-Semitism did not play the decisive role that, without any doubt, it had in Hitler's ideology' [23]. The material relating to actual distribution of DeJ confirms her thesis. Der ewige Jude and the Final Solution Fritz Hippler was put on trial in 1948, his film, in the view of the court, having had 'a decisive influence on the formation of the German people's opinion against the Jews'. Hippler himself was found 'not guilty' of persecuting the Jews because of a lack of evidence. Since he had helped persons persecuted by the Nazis, including Erich K~istner, and had been forced out of his position as Head of the Film Department in 1943, his imprisonment up to the time of the verdict was considered punishment enough by the German court which tried him [24]. DeJ did not elicit much discussion again until the 1960s, when excerpts started appearing in documentary film and television programs. Since then most film historians have found irresistible the causal relationship between DeJ and the mass extermination. The conclusion of the film includes two moments intended to have a very strong impact on the viewer. The Shehitah (ritual slaughter) is meant to horrify; Hitler's speech to the Reichstag, 30 January 1939, is included in excerpt, and his words are meant to be taken at face value: 'if the international Jewish financiers in and outside Europe should succeed in plunging the nations once more into a world war, then the result will not be the Bolshevizing of the earth, and thus the victory of Jewry, but the annihilation of the Jewish race in Europe!' [25] The film, through its editing, invites the viewer to move from revulsion over the ritual slaughter of innocent animals to Hitler's own prophecy as to what should be done about those who slaughter animals in so brutal a fashion. Hitler, obsessed with anti-Semitism, may well have meant what he said. There is, however, no evidence to suggest that Goebbels had the annihilation of European Jewry in mind, or that DeJ intended viewers to accept literally the idea of the mass extermination. When DeJ was in gestation, the Final Solution meant deportation to Poland, and then, in 1940, deportation to Madagascar [26]. What might the meaning of DeJ be, if not to turn citizens into indulgent mass murderers? Contemporary English commentators considered the anti-Semitic propaganda of 1940-1941 a type of Ersatz.propaganda, intended to fill space in lieu of


Der ewige Jude

51

victory over England. One must that discussion within interested political and istrative hierarchies inside Nazi as to the Final Solution changed dramatically during the extended period when Deft was in production. None of this debate is apparent in the release print. Deft uses the medium of film to create a logical, scientific documented explanation for anti-Semitism as state policy, but does not in any way argue for the Final Solution. Goebbels insisted on an overwhelming number of facts and figures to force on viewers the validity of the thesis that Jews are responsible for all that was wrong in German society. Had Deft argued for the emotional integrative patriotism of Triumph of the Will, its creative impulse might be recognized more easily. But Deft has a conspiracy to lay bare in a relentlessly negative way. Those seeking escapist fare simply refused to accept such a litany of negativism. There are other reasons why Deft fails as a persuasive piece of propaganda. 1. Lack of viewer involvement. The viewer is lectured at by an omniscient narrator, and is not able to participate emotionally in the development of the film's thesis. A dull script means the film communicates as a slide lecture, thus failing to capitalize on film's potential as a medium. 2. Unrelieved grimness of subject. The typical filmgoer in , 1940-1941, paid an ission fee to go to the cinema to enjoy escapist fare. The SD reports summarize scattered impressions, but every person, including those who received the SD reports in 1941, believed strongly that they told the truth. Viewers in could not stand what they were asked to pay to sit through. The SD reports fail to separate the 'youth' version of Deft from the full version, but it appears that women were repelled by what they were asked to see. Indeed, the existence of two versions of the film suggests that Goebbels knew before the film premiered that its message was presented in too-brutal a fashion. There is something fundamentally wrong with a mass media campaign which from the outset has to offer two versions of the same product. 3. The wrong strategy. It is quite obvious that Deft is in no sense of the word a true documentary film. It uses long pieces of feature film, blends historical lecture with newsreel footage of Jewish ghetto life, and falls hopelessly, on dramaturgical grounds, between feature fictional treatment and newsreel coverage. The reason is easy to understand. Such obsessive anti-Semitism cannot be part of a true documentary because it is impossible to use a visual medium to authenticate the belief that all Jews are sub-human. Such a belief requires a 'leap of faith', and only a fictional treatment would allow such an attitude to be developed, such as the popular anti-Semitic feature film fud Siiss, one of the most successful of all Nazi films. A harangue, or some written diatribe full of mysterious facts and figures is a better technique of persuasion, though inevitably such materials are most helpful in reinforcing the attitudes of the already-persuaded. 4. Test-screenings by uncritical colleagues. No other feature film made in between 1933 and 1945, was subject to repeated test-screenings, a testament to the unique subject matter and contents of Deft. But it seems that there were none among the selected viewers prepared to it that 'the emperor has no clothes'. The truth came from the SD reports. One might also note that the official second-class Priidikat meant that film professionals saw the impossibility of selling such vile medicine as escapist tonic to theaters where cinema owners sought to maximize attendance. It is instructive to think about the test-screening as market research for a consumer product. But party hacks proved unrepresentative of the typical filmgoer. And one


52

S. HornshCj-M#ller & D. Culbert

must also that those who made DeJ knew they were trying something problematic, about which many persons, including Goebbels, felt unsure. Today there continue to be fears that DeJ must not be shown lest it create a new wave of anti-Semitism. A recent Swedish television program, shown on 18 September 1991, included scenes of neo-Nazi organizations screening DeJ to instill anti-Semitism in new recruits. In America the director of the National Center for Jewish Film at Brandeis University recently has urged publicly that DeJ be locked up for all but selected scholars. What evidence exists as to the impact of DeJ on today's viewers? Two German psychologists, Yizhak Ahren and Christoph Melchers, in 1986-1987, made a careful study of DeJ and its impact on modern viewers. They concluded that 'an immediate reaction to the film by almost all participants is a strong desire to talk'. They feel that conditions in have changed so much since 1945 and public knowledge of the Final Solution's basic purpose is so widespread that the film no longer has the impact it had in 1940. But they believe the film is 'still able to create uncertainty about Jews and make existing prejudices topical' [27]. They note that modern viewers want 'trustworthy information' about topics discussed in the film. The commercial distribution of Der ewige Jude suggests the limits of official antiSemitism in 1940. DeJ fails as propaganda because it unsuccessfully blends archival footage with feature film sequences, and visually shocks--instead of instruct i n g - t h e viewer with the analogy to rats, to say nothing of gratuitous violence in the ritual slaughter scenes. The film is the product of an academic mind, not a gifted filmmaker. Little of DeJ's editing can be considered successful from an aesthetic point of view. The wordy narration tells the viewer what to look for, instead of letting visual images make an impression through visual effective editing. Sometimes the visual images argue against the narration, as in the excerpt from M (1932). The brilliant acting of Peter Lorre in fact undercuts M's value as an example of Jewish propaganda, instead showing the viewer that M is one of the greatest pieces of acting ever filmed. Der ewige Jude is a monument to vicious anti-Semitism never equalled. Its creation also points to the chaotic realities of istration in the Nazi era. Down from Goebbels came a command; changes followed changes; secondary orders went out to those whose performance lay beyond Goebbels' direct control. As test marketing reshaped the final product, one deadline gave way to the next. New assignments intervened. A notorious film finally emerged from a process which proves that beyond the facade of totalitarian control lay the reality of a hierarchical organization whose structural disorganization undermined any sense of individual moral responsibility.

Correspondence: Stig Hornsh~/j-Mcfller, Lc~vgaardsvej 33, DK-2830 Virum, Denmark; David Culbert, Department of History, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70803, USA. NOTES This article is based on the exhaustivedocumentation in S'rIGHORNSHOI-MOLLER& Sus~'qN^VID^(1991) G 171 Der ewigeJude (1940): EinsteUungsprotokollzuT IWF-Edition (G6ttingen, IWF). Karsten Fledelius, University of Copenhagen,has providedcontinuing goingback to 1970. The frame enlargementsare courtesy of the Photography Lab, Louisiana State University. The English translation was prepared by David Culbert. [1] ELKEFd6HI.ma (Ed.) (1987) D/e Tagebiicheryon Joseph Goebbels:SiimaicheFragmeme(Mtinchen), 3 September 1940, 4, p~ 306; 24 October 1939, 3, p. 619. [2] ERWlN LmSBR(1968) Deutschland, er~vache!(Hamburg), p. 67; HANS BARKHAUSEN(1970) 'Die NSDAP als Filmproduzentin', in: GOWrH~RMOLTMANN& KARLFRIEDRICHREIMERS(Eds) Zeitge-

Der ewige J u d e

[3]


[4]

[5]

[6]

[7] [8]

[9]

[10] [11]

[12]

[13]

[14]

[15]

53

schichte im Film-und Tondokument (G0ttingen), p. 166. For analyses of Deft see DAVIDWELCH (1983) Propaganda and the German Cinema, 1933-1945 (Oxford), pp. 280-306; and DOROTHEAHOL/.~TEIN (1983) "ffud Siiss' und die Deutschen: Antisemitischen Vorurteile im nationalsozialistischen Spielfilm (Frankfurt), pp. 108-117. See MICH^EL SCHMIDT (1991) Wahrheit machtfrei, Swedish television Kanal 1, 18 September 1991. See also TONg ROGERS(1991) Debate increases over use of films made by Nazis, Nero Orleans TimesPicayune, 22 April 1991, p. A-2; R~ECCA L r ~ (1991) Nazi hate movies continue to ignite fierce ions', New York Times, 4 August 1991, 16-H. Deft, rain., may be purchased on 89 VI-IS videocassette from International Historic Films, Box 29035, Chicago, Illinois, 60629 USA; tel. 312-927-2900. The cost is $59.95 plus $3 for shipping within the USA. The film is also available on 89 PAL for an additional $5. Overseas orders require prepayment by international money order plus overseas postage. Deft, G-171, minutes, on 16 mm film, may be borrowed without cost (educational groups within only) from the Institut for den wissenschafflichen Film, Nonnenstieg 72, 3400 G6ttingen, ; tel. 0551/2020; FAX 0551/202200. ELKE FROHHCH (1989) 'Joseph Goebbels--Der Propagandist', in: RONMa) SM~LSF.R & R/U~q~R ZITELMA~ (Eds) Die Braune Elite (Darmstadt), pp. 65-67. Also instructive is 'Joseph Goebbels-Gesehen yon dem UFA-Star Lid^ Baarova', ARD television, 7 April 1991. EBE~ T^tYBERT, D/e ftudenfrage, 28 November 1940, p. 188; 1947 Heinz Klutb Interrogation, Berlin Document Center. For Goebbels' direction of the Kristallnacht programs (the flippant designation was his) see NoRA LEVIN (1973) The Holocaust, pp. 80-81; UwE DIETRICH ADAM,ftudenpolitik im Dritten Reich (1972), pp. 205-207; and the entires for Goebbels and Kristallnacht in the ISRAEL GtrrMaN (Editor-in-Chief) (1990) Encylopedia of the Holocaust, 2, pp. 591-592; 836-840. FRITZ Hn'PLErt (1981) Die Verstrickung (Dfisseldorf), p. 187 See also HIPI'LER (1991) Der ewigeftude: Anmerkungen zum Film--Nicht nur in eigner Sache, in Deutsche Annalen 1991: ftahrbuch des Nationalgeschenens, 20. ftahr (Leoni am Starnberger See), pp. 210-225, copy sent to Hornshdj-Mr by Hippler. Those wishing to Fritz Hippler may reach him at Am Rad 7, 8240 Berchtesgaden, ; tel. 49.8652.63078. The ritual slaughter, synagogue, and much of the ghetto scenes were shot in Lodz, Poland, 11-13 October 1939. For a thorough introduction to the Lodz ghetto see H.~,rNO LOWEY & G ~ l t , m) SC~IOENBERGER(1991) (Eds) 'Unser einziger Weg ist Arbeit': Das Getto in Lode, 1940-1944 (Wien). HIPPER (1981) p. 187; 17 October 1939 Fr6hlich 3, p. 612. See also 'Joseph Goebbels', in: Hom~sHeijM~/LLER (1991), Einleitung, pp. 5-6. ADAM,ftudenpolitik (1972) pp. 233-46. See the exhibition catalog: HANS DIEEOW (1937) Der ewige Jude (Miinchen). For a photograph of the exterior of the Munich Deft exhibition see STEPI-~Nm BARRON (1991) 'Degenerate Art:. the fate of the Avant-Garde in Nazi (New York), p. 14. 24 October 1939, FrOhlich 3, p. 619; 21 December 1939, Fr6hlich 3, p. 672. See PETER BUCHER(1982) 'Die Bedeutung des Films als historische Quelle: Der ewige ftude', in: H. D U ~ T & M. SCHLmqrd~ (Eds) Festschriftfiir Eberhard Kessel zum 75. Geburtstag (M0nchen), pp. 300-329. For additional information about Hippler, as well as Eberhard Taubert (who wrote the narration) see HORI,ISrtOJ-M6LLER (1991 Einleitung, pp. 7-11. FRANK M.~atAtrN (1940) 'Symphonie des Ekels: Der ewige ftude--ein abendffillender Dokumentfilm', Der deutsche Film, 4, pp. 156-161. Concerning Yidl mit'n Fidl (1936) by Joseph Green and Jan Nowina-Przybylski, see ERIC ARTrrOR GOLDMAN (1979) 'A World History of the Yiddish Cinema', (Ph.D. dissertation, New York University), p. 225. HII'I'LEE (1981) p. 214, claims this scene particularly increased Goebbels' anti-Semitism. 9 January 1940, Fr6hiich 4, p. 7; 12 January 1940, Fr6hlich 4, p. 11; 6 February 1940, Fr6hlich 4, p. 35; 27 February 1940, Fr6hlich 4, p. 55; 4 April 1940, Fr6hlich 4, p. 97. See also BUCHER(1982) p. 305. Hans Hinkel to Hippler, 2 March 1940: Ausserungen zu dem Film Der eroige Jude--anl~isslich der Vorfiihrung vor einen geschlossenen Kreis yon etwa 120 Personen am 1. Mgtrz 19407 Mc31a, Institut fiir Zeitgeschichte, (IfZ), Miinchen. 9 May, 10 May 1940, Fr6hlich 4, pp. 150-151, p. 196; 3 September 1940, FrOhlich 4, p. 306; 11 October 1940, Fr6hlich 4, p. 361; W. A. BOEI.CK~ (1966) Kriegspropaganda 1939-1941: Geheime Ministerkonferenzen im Reichspropaganda Ministerium (Stuttgart), p. 487. Filmprfifstelle 4 November 1940, Bundesarchiv, Koblenz (BA); BtrCHER (1982) pp. 305-306. A. BRODBECK 2)er ewige Jude--Uraufffihrung der grossen Dokumentarfilms', Deutsche AUgemeine Zeitung, 29 November 1940; 30 November 1940. For Ostraum, see Filmarchiv Mag. Nr 3010, Priifnummer 52, 901, 21 June 1940, BA. The 12-minute film was directed by Werner Buhre. lllustrierte Film-Kurier 3152/1940. This complete translation of the summary appears in Welch

54

[16] [17]

[18] [19]


[20]

[21]

S. Hornshr

& D. Culbert

(1983), pp. 292-293. The newsreel, Nr. 534/49/1940, is found in BA. There were 12 subjects, including the bombing of Coventry; see Bucher (1982), pp. 306-307. For a summary of DeJ's contents, see BARUCH G r r u s (1981) 'The Nazi anti-Semitic film: a study o f its productional [sic] rhetoric', (Ph.D. dissertation, University of Southern California), pp. 125-159. Die Judenfrage, 28 November 1940, pp. 186-1881 Der Film, 48, 30 November 19401Film-Kurier 27 November 19401 Filmwelt 6 December 1940. HIPPLER, Die fudenfrage, 28 November 1940, p. 188. BUCHER(1982) p. 318. Ganfilmstelle Hessen/Nassan to Lichtspieltheaterbesitzer in Gau Hessen-Nassan, 23 November 1940, Deutsches Institut ffir Filmkunde, Frankfurt.; CURT BELLING & A. SCrmTZE (1937) Der Film in der Hitler- fugend (Berlin). RW4/v.293 OWK/Wehrmachtsfiihrung/Abt. Wehrmachtsprnpaganda, Bundesarchiv-Mitit~archiv, Freiburg; HmMAR HOFFMAmq (1988) 'Und die Fahne F~hrt um in die Ewigkeit': Propaganda im NSFilm (Frankfurt), p. 166.; BUCHER (1982) p. 317. Compare with Berliner Morgenpost and Vtlkischer Beobachter, Berliner Ausgabe, 28 November 1940. The data on tickets sold and numbers of theaters is in WELCH (1983) p. 35. It is possible to estimate the maximum number of persons who paid to see Deft at commercial theaters, 1940-1941. In 1940, 8,341,000 tickets were sold; in 1941, 8,923,000; this means an average of 13-14 visits per year for each person over age fifteen. Large Berlin theaters had several screenings per day, but in small towns, no more than one or two. Presuming 350 days per year with regular commercial screenings (omitting official holidays and Good Friday), we can estimate 2.25 screenings as an average daily estimate for all theaters in . Then we can make the following computation: 834.1 + 892.3 • 10/2 + 8,300 (total number of theaters) • 2.25 screenings • 350 days= 132 persons per screening.

[22] [23]

[24] [25]

[26] [27]

Then we compare the 1940 Berlin Handbook, listing all cinemas, with cinema programs, as listed twice a week (when programs could change) in the Berliner Morgenpost and V~lkischer Beobachter, Berliner Ausgabe. The listings suggest that roughly half of all Berlin theaters (where interest was high) showed the film. By extension, about half of all German theaters, or 4000, showed the film, in part because Deft received a second-class Prtidikat. We take 4000 theaters • 4 days (the shortest-possible run, and the length the film stayed in most Berlin theaters which showed it) • 2.25 x 132 and we get a maximum audience of paid issions of 4.75 million. But there is plenty of evidence to suggest this to be far too generous an estimate. SD Report R 58/1157, 20 January 1941, pp. 7-9, printed as appendix in ERWIN LEISER (1968) Nat/ Cinema, pp. 157-158. FREIDRICH KUILLI etal. (1983) fud Siiss: Filmprotokolg Programheft und Einzelanalysen (Berlin), p. 67. MARLIS 8TEINERT (1970) Hitlers Krieg und die Deutschen: Stimmung und Haltung der deutschen Bevblkerung im zzoeiten Weltkrieg (DiisseldorO, p. 263. She cites two opinion polls of party taken between November 1938 and the fall of 1942 as to attitudes towards 'radical' solutions of the Jewish problem. Urteilsbegriindung Fritz Hippler Mc31d, Ifz. See also HORIqSltOJ-M6LLER (1991) Einleitung, pp. 7-11. For the 30 January 1939 speech, see J. NOAKIgS& G. PRIDHAM(Eds) (1988) Nazism 1919-1945, Vol. II: Foreign Policy, War and Racial Extermination (New York), pp. 1049-1050. The authors summarize the vexing issue of numbers of Jews killed in the Final Solution: 'The total number of Jews who d i e d . . , can never be known exactly since we lack detailed figures even for those who were gassed' (pp. 1206-1208). See also MARTIN BROSZAT(1977) Hitler und die Genesis tier 'Endltsung', Vierteljahresheftefur Zeitgeschichte, 25, p. 750, u. 22; and WILLIAM CARR (1987) Nazi policy against the Jews', in: RICHARD BaSeL (Ed.) Life in the Third Reich (Oxford), pp. 74-75. The original newsreel, UFA Wochenschan 439/1939, is in BA. See ARIqO J. MAYER (1988) Why Did the Hea~em Not Darken?: the "Final Solution" in History, pp. 195-197, 303-306. D. SIlqGTON & A. WEIDEhamLD (1942) The Goebbels Experimen~ a study of the Nazi propaganda machine (London). YIZBAK AHREtq, S~G HORN$I~J-M~LLER & CHRISTOPH B. MELCHER$ (1990) Der

ewige rude: wie Goebbels hetzte: Untersuchungen zum nationalsozialistischen Propagandafilm (Aachen), pp. 39-62. See also STIG HORNSHDJ-MDLLER(1980) "Derewige rude (1940)--as a means for teaching historical media criticism', in: K. R. M. SHORT & KARSTEN FLEDELIUS (Eds) History and Film: methodology, research, education. Studies in History, Film, and Society, 2 (Copenhagen), pp. 231-235. For an excellent summary of the methodological problems of gauging contemporary audience reaction

Der ewigeJude

55


to Nazi film, see EIKE HENNIG (1991) Diesen Faschistenliimmeln ist nicht zu trauen: Hitler-junge Quex im piidagogischen Einsatz', in: MARTIN LOIPF-a~DINGER (Ed.) Miirtyrerlegenden im NS-Film (Opladen), pp. 173-86. [28] The phrase "The Bolshevizing of the earth and thus" is omitted from that part of the speech which appears in Deft. Indeed, the speech is a constructed piece of newsreel footage. Hitler's voiceover was recorded especially for Deft, incorporating sentences originally from several different parts of the 30 January 1939 speech, as can be seen by comparing DeJ's version with the actual newsreel coverage of the same speech.

Stig HornshcJj-M#ller received his Mag. art. in history from the University of Copenhagen. He is a former Research Scholar and Fellow, Institute of Scientific Film (IWF), G~ttingen. He was formerly Lecturer at the Free University of Berlin and the Hochschule flit Film und Fernsehen, Munich. Currently he is an editor at GF~S International, Copenhagen. His publications include YIZH~ AItRgN, STIO HORNS~y-MDLLER & CHRISTOPHB. MELCHERS(1990) Der ewige Jude--Wie Goebbels hetzte: Untersuchungen zum nationalsozialistichen Propagandafilm (Aachen, Alano); and with SUSANNa VIDA (1991) G 171 Der ewige Jude (1940): Einstellungsprotokoll zur IWF-Edition (Gi~ttingen, 1WF). David Culbert is Professor of History, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, USA; and Secretary General of IAMHIST. He is writing (with Martin Loiperdinger), Nazi Cinema Propaganda and the Riefenstahl Myth for Cambridge University Press.

Appendix A Der ewige Jude: a chronology 1933-1939 Remarkably few anti-Semitic subjects in Nazi cinema, considering Hitler's attitudes. 1934 Goebbels and Eberhard Tanbert establish the Institute for the Study of the Jewish Question, an archive for anti-Semitic materials. The Institute publishes D/e Juden in Deutschland in various editions. 1936 Reichsfilmarchiv established to collect feature films as well as documentaries and newsreels. For possible use in Tendenz films (including those with anti-Semitic themes) a special catalog is established, including a of possible stock shots. 8 November 1937. Goebbels and Julius Streicher open exhibition in Munich, Der ewige Jude, containing material from the Institute for the Study of the Jewish Question. Hans Diebow publishes a booklet to accompany the exhibition. There is also a small screening room, showing excerpts from selected Weimar feature films, and a 16 mm amateur film of kosher butchering in Hungary. The exhibition later goes to Vienna, Rome, Paris, Boudeanx, and Nantes. 29 December 1937. Premiere of film made by Walter B6tticher for the Propaganda Ministry, Juden ohne Maske (Jews without their Masks) incorporating film excerpts shown in Munich exhibition. 9-10 November 1938. Kristallnacht (Night of the Broken Glass). Anti-Semitic program throughout and Austria ordered by Goebbels. The name derives from KristaUglus (beveled plate glass), referring to broken shopwindows in Jewish stores. 17 November 1938. Goebbels orders production of anti-Semitic feature film, D/e Rothschilds, in answer to Twentieth Century Fox's House of Rothschild (1934), an historically cloaked defense of Jews being persecuted in Nazi . The House of Rothschild advocates Jewish assimilation. Jud Siiss (1940) is the Nazi reder to the 1935 English feature film of the same title. c. 17 November 1938. Goebbels orders a documentary film about the Jews but cannot get permission from the Polish government to film in the Warsaw ghetto. c. August-September 1939. The Hitler-Stalin Pact ends official attacks on Bolshevism. Eberhard Taubert renews his anti-Semitic efforts, and outlines the concept of the film Der ewige Jude (DeJ). 2 October 1939. Army propaganda company cameramen are ordered to film stories of Jewish life in Poland. 8 October 1939. Goebbels orders Fritz Hippler to direct the filming of the Jewish ghetto in Lodz, Poland. 11-13 October 1939. Hippler and camera crew in Lodz. Shooting of exterior scenes, the synagogue service, and the kosher ritual slaughtering of animals. 17 October 1939. Goebbels reports to Hitler about Deft', Goebbels sees first rushes. 24 October 1939. Goebbels sees more rushes, and decides Deft must be a 'propaganda masterpiece'. 28 October 1939. Goebbels sees more rushes, including ritual slaughter scenes. 29 October 1939. Goebbels shows Hitler the ritual slaughter scenes.


56

S. Hornshc~j-Mdller & D. Culbert

31 October-1 November 1939. Goebbels goes to Lodz. Eberhard Taubert and cameraman Erich Stoll shoot additional scenes, probably including the interior o f the Talmudic school, bartering in the synagogue, and quite possibly the before and after shots o f orthodox Jews changing to European clothing. 2 November 1939. Goebbels sees additional Deft sequences. 3 November 1939. Goebbels discusses the Jewish question with Hitler and corrects Eberhard Taubert's script. 8 November 1939. Goebbels sees rushes of footage just shot in Lodz. 11 November 1939. Goebbels discusses film with Hitler, who offers additional ideas. 19 November 1939. Goebbels notes in his diary that he worked again on Deft. 21 December 1939. Goebbels rejects Hippler's suggestions for the dramaturgy of Deft. 9 January 1940. Screening of rough cut of Deft. 12 January 1940. Goebbels, after showing rough cut to Hitler, reworks Deft. 1 March 1940. Screening of revised rough cut to large group of propaganda experts. Agreement that another revision is needed. 4 April 1940. Goebbels sees third revision of rough cut and decides to show it to Hitler. 9 May 1940. One day before Nazi invasion of Holland, Goebbels sees 4th revision and orders additional changes. 9 June 1940. Goebbels sees 5th revision and orders changes in narration. 20 June 1940. Surrender of . Part of Deft team involved with newsreel coverage of . 3 September 1940. Goebbels sees 6th revision and is finally satisfied. 8 September 1940. De] shown to test group which suggests the full version be shown only at Nazi Party meetings. Test group urges an additional milder version. 10 September 1940. Goebbels agrees to make milder version of Deft for women and children. 11 October 1940. Goebbels approves the final full-length and milder versions of Deft. 4 November 1940. The film gets approval from the censor in lengths of 1753 m (6489 minutes) and 1830 m (6789 minutes) Film receives only second-best official rating. The G6ttingen G171 print is 69 minutes; the original censor's report errs as to length. 28 November 1940. Premiere of both full-length and milder versions of Deft at Ufa Palast-am-Zoo in Berlin. December 1940--January 1941. D e ] shown in theaters all over . T h e n distributed by Party for Hitler Youth Filmfeierstuden; later shown to soldiers in the Wehrmacht. 29 August 1941. Dutch premiere of De eeuwige flood, which is shown in all Dutch cinemas by 30 April 1942. 1942 French premiere of La Peril ftuif.

Appendix ll English Translation of the German Narration Title: The Eternal flew [Fig. 3] 2d Title: A film contribution to the problem of world Jewry 3d Title: A documentary film from the German Film Society [Deutsche Filmherstellungs--und Verwertungsgesellschaft], based on an idea of Dr Eberhard Taubert [Fig. 4]

Director: Fritz Hippler [Fig. 5] Music: Franz R. Friedl Cameramen: Albert Endrejat, Anton Hafner, Robert Hartmann, Friedrich Carl Herre, Heinz Kluth, Erich Stoll, Hans Ebethard Winterfeld

Film editors: Hans Dieter Schiller and Albert Banmeister Rolling Title: The civilized Jews we know in give but an incomplete picture of their true character. This film includes actual footage from the Polish ghettos. It shows us the Jews as they really are, before they conceal themselves behind the mask of the civilized European.

Narrator: The campaign in Poland gave us the opportunity to get to know Jewry well. Nearly four million Jews live here in Poland, although you would never find them in rural areas. Nor have they suffered from the chaos of war, as has the native Pole. They were non-participants, in the dark streets of the Polish ghetto--yet within an hour o f the German occupation they were back in business. We Germans had an opportunity 25 years ago to look briefly at the Polish ghetto. This time, our eyes have been opened by the experiences of the last decades. We no longer see, as in 1914, merely grotesque elements in these strange ghetto types--we recognize that here is a plague that threatens the health of the Aryan


Der ewige Jude

FIG. 3.

FIG. 4.

57


58

S. Hornsh#j-M#ller & D. Culbert

FIG. 5.

people. Richard Wagner once said: "The Jew is the evil force behind mankind's corruption!" These pictures prove it. The home life of the Jews shows a lack of civilization. To be blunt, Jewish houses are dirty and neglected. One must that these Jews are not, by any stretch of the imagination, poor. After decades spent in trading, they have hoarded enough money to create for themselves clean and comfortable homes. But they have lived for generations in the same dirty, bug-ridden dwellings. Untroubled by their surroundings, they go right on with their prayers. The bobbing movements are part of the ritual, part of how they read Jewish scripture. The main part of so-called community life takes place in the street. Rarely will you find Jews engaged in useful work. Even then it does not happen willingly. T h e German military Government has employed them in removing rubble. They aren't used to hard work, nor do they like it. This isn't helplessness, to be pitied, but something quite different. These Jews don't want to work but to barter, where they are in their element. It is not true that Jews are forced into trading because other occupations and professions are closed to them. It is the opposite. They rush into trade because it suits their character and inclination. One might consider these haggling children a sign of poverty. But to those who observe them for some time it is obvious that they are proud to imitate their elders. These children have no idealism. The individual Jew has no higher goal. Instead Jewish morality proclaims, unlike Aryan morality, that the unrestrained egoism of each Jew is divine law. His religion makes cheating and usury a duty. In Deuteronomy, for instance: 'Unto a foreigner thou mayest lend upon usury, but unto thy brother thou shalt not lend upon usury: that the Lord thy God may bless thee in all that thou puttest thine hand into.' For the Jews, then, business is something holy. For non-Jews this is incomprehensible. The Aryan attached meaniug to every action. He wants to create something worthwhile. Food, clothing, machines, works of art, or anything else of value to society. He is ruled by feelings of personal commitment to achieve. For the Jew there is only one thing of value--money. How he earns it makes no difference. The first goods are usually worthless rubbish. That is how the little Jew starts. Soon they have set themselves up with a tray, and soon they have gathered a complete line of merchandise. Soon after, they own a stand. The ambitious soon own a little shop. Then a bigger shop. The most cunning, i.e. the most unscrupulous, own warehouses and large banks and eventually live in the most splendid houses and villas of the towns, provided they don't get in each other's hair, as in the narrow ghettos of the East. That is why they try to escape to rich lands with rich peoples. They need other peoples because they need goods to trade. The values of creative Aryan peoples have been watered-down by the Jew to the level of mere merchandise, which he buys and sells but cannot personally produce. He leaves production to the workers and peasants of the host nation. The Jews are a race lacking farmers or workers, a race of parasites. Whenever a sore shows itself on the


Der ewigeJude

59

body of a people, the Jews settle and feed on the decaying organism. They find business in the sickness of a nation; therefore they try to increase every form of sickness. This is the case in Poland--it used to be true in as well. The Jews have been this way throughout their history. They bear features of the eternal parasite, the features of the eternal Jew, who has never changed. There is no difference between these Jews in Poland and these in Palestine, although the two are widely separated. Palestine is the spiritual center for international Jewry, though, numerically, the Jews there are insignificant. Here at the Wailing Wall, Jews gather and mourn the fall of Jerusalem. But their homelessness is of their own choosing and in keeping with their entire history. Four thousand years ago their Hebrew forefathers were already wandering. They left Mesopotamia, the 'Land of Two Rivers', wandering down the coast towards Egypt, where, for a while, they carried on a flourishing grain trade. When the local agricultural population showed resistance towards the foreign usurers and speculators, they wandered once more, plundering their way to the Holy Land, where they settled and pillaged mercilessly the lawful and culturally-advanced inhabitants. Here, over centuries, developed the ultimate mongrolized Jew: the oriental Near Eastern race plus a negroid ixture--differing from Europeans, coming as we do from very different racial elements, in body, and above all in soul. We would never have been bothered by them, had they remained in their Eastern homeland. But the cosmopolitan empire of Alexander the Great, reaching from the Near East across half of the Mediterranean, and, of course, the boundless Roman empire brought out their trading and migratory instincts. They had soon spread across the Mediterranean sea. Some groups settled in large towns, the trade and communication centers of the Mediterranean. Others wondered still further: Spain, , southern , and England. Everywhere they were disliked. When the people of Spain and rose against them in the 13th and 14th centuries, they wandered on further, mainly to . From there they followed the creative waves of German colonization of the East, until finally they found a gigantic new untapped reservoir of space in Poland and eastern Europe. The nineteenth century, with its hazy thoughts of human equality and freedom, gave the Jews a powerful boost. From Eastern Europe, in the past hundred years, they spread like an irresistible tide, flooding the towns and nations of Europe, in fact, the entire world. Similar to these Jewish wandering throughout the world are the wanderings of an equally restless animal, the rat. Rats have been parasites from the start. Its origin was in Asia. From there it migrated in vast hordes across Russia and the Balkans to Europe. By the middle of the eighteenth century they were already found across all of Europe. Towards the end of the nineteenth century, as a result of the shipping trade, they took possession of America and also Africa and the Far East. [Fig. 6] Wherever rats appear they bring ruin, by destroying mankind's goods and foodstuffs. They spread disease, and plague, such as leprosy, typhoid fever, cholera, and dysentery. They are cunning~ cowardly, and cruel,

FIG. 6. Rat sequence filmed in Berlin. 'Similar to these Jewish wanderings throughout the world are the wanderings of an equally restless animal, the rat.'

60

S. Hornshdj-Mdller & D. Culbert


and are found mostly in large packs. They represent craftiness and subterranean destruction--just like the Jews among other human beings. This Jewish race of parasites is responsible for most international crime. In 1932, Jews, 1% of the world's population, ed for 34% of the world's drug trade and 47% of the robberies; in crooked games of chance, 47%; in international crime organizations, 82%; and in prostitution, 98%. The common language of international thieves comes from Hebrew and Yiddish. These physiognomies refute conclusively the liberal theories of the equality of all men. Jews change their outward appearance when they leave their Polish haunts for the wider world. Hair, beard, skull cap, and caftan make the Eastern Jew recognizable to all. If he appears without his trademarks, only the sharp-eyed can recognize his racial origins. It is an intrisic trait of the Jew that he always tries to hide his origin when he is among non-Jews.

FIG. 7. 'Hair, beard, skull cap, and caftan make the Eastern Jew recognizable to a l l . . . It is an intrinsic trait of the Jew that he aiways tries to hide his origin when he is among non-Jews. A bunch of Polish Jews--now wearing caftans--now ready to steal into Western Civilization.'

D e r ewige J u d e

61

A bunch of Polish Jews--now wearing caftans--now ready to steal into Western civilization [Fig. 7]. O f course, these ghetto Jews do not yet know how to look at ease in fine European suits. These Berlin Jews are more adept. Their fathers and forefathers lived in ghettos, but that's not apparent now. Here, in the second and third generation, Aryanization has reached its zenith. Outwardly they try to imitate their hosts. People lacking in intuition let themselves be deceived by this mimicry and think of Jews as just the same as they are. Therein lies the dreadful danger. These assimilated Jews remain forever foreign bodies in the organism of their hosts, no matter how they seem to appear outwardly.

Subtitle: Baron Maurice de Rothschild Subtitle: Major James de Rothschild Narrator: Here we show an excerpt from a film, about the House of Rothschild. American Jews produced it, a tribute to one of the greatest names in Jewish history. They honor them here in typical Jewish manner, delighting in the way old Meier Amschel Rothschild cheats the state which made him welcome by feigning poverty to avoid paying taxes.


(FILM: The House of Rothschild: d. Alfred Werker, starring George Arliss, Twentieth Century 1934)

English dialogue with German subtitles Meier: Hurry up Charles, come up James, over to the fireplace. , no meal for the last five days, understand. Children: Yes, father. Wife: Are you hungry. Children: Not so very. Wife: T h e n look hungry! Children: Look hungry, ha, ha, ha! Meier: Amschel, Salomon, you remain below. Mama, hide the roast! Tax Collector: All right, we'll take the Rothschilds next. Meier: Mama, take your sewing there. Nathan, by me. Wife: Nathan, take your hands out o f your pocket! Tax Collector: Open up, Jew. Meier: Who is it, Nathan? Tax Collector: Call it off, Jew! Meier: Why my good friend, the tax collector. Tax Collector: Bring out your book! Meier: Certainly, Sir, here it is. I was just looking over it. Times are very bad. I was saying to my poor wife. Ah, Gudula, ah, this is our friend the tax collector. Never have I known such a bad month. For five days not one Gulden have I seen. Ah, our customers come, yes, but they don't buy. No one is travelling these days, so my exchange business is worse than nothing. I shall soon starve. Tax Collector: Starve, eh? Ha, something smells good! Meier: One of our neighbours must be having a roast. Close the window, Mama! Tax Collector: What do you take me for? Meier: Honestly, I don't understand what you mean. Tax Collector: Rothschild, you're doing more business than any Jew in Jewstreet. You're going to pay 20,000 Gulden. Meier: 20,000. Wait! the big merchant in the city doesn't pay as much as that! Tax Collector: That's another matter. He's outside the ghetto. He's not a Jew. Meier: Oh, you are going to kill me this instant. I could barely raise a thousand Gulden. Tax Collector: Upstairs--search the house. Pull the bed apart! Meier: I may perhaps raise 2000 Gulden.

Meier: Much gold is lost by sending it by mail coach from one land to another. In war the enemy gets it, in peace--the robbers. You are five brothers. Each will open a banking house. One in Paris, one in Vienna, one in London--select the most important capitals for yourselves. If money is to be sent to Nathan in London no one needs risk his life. Just send a letter to Nathan in London to pay so and so. That will be our signal to send a loan. Soon there will be many wars and the states needing to transport money will come to the Rothschilds. The money will be safe. Narrator: At this point, it must be noted that transfer of money by check was not an invention of the Jews, nor was it developed by them for the good of mankind, but simply to serve as a means o f obtaining international influence over their hosts. Meier: Union is strength. You must always stick together. No one brother can be allowed to fail while


62

S. Hornshdj-M6ller & D. Culbert

another succeeds. Our five banking houses will rule Europe. One firm, one family--the Rothschilds. That will be your strength. When you are successful, the ghetto. Narrator: So Nathan goes to London and becomes an Englishman; Jacob goes to Paris and becomes a Frenchman; Salomon goes to Vienna and becomes an Austrian; Carl goes to Naples and becomes an Italian; Amschel stays in Frankfurt and remains a German. But all remain Jews. During the French Revolution, when Jews were first given citizenship in their respective countries, they suddenly belonged to two nations simultaneously. It's not for nothing that they have blood relatives at every European court, providing confidential information. In this century of industry, Jewish business blooms as never before. The House of Rothschild is but one example of the efforts of the Jews to spread their financial influence over the honest worker. The House of Warburg and other Jewish banking families follow the same tactics. By the beginning o f the twentieth century, the Jews sit at the junctions o f the world's financial markets. They are an international power. Though but 1% of the world's population, with their capital they terrorize the world stock exchanges, world opinion, and world politics. Today New York is the center of Jewish power. New York's stock exchange, the financial center of the world, is ruled by such Jewish banking houses as Kuhn, Loeb, Warbnrg, Hanauer, Wertheim, Lewisolm, Seligmann, Guggenheim, Wolff, Schiff, Strauss, and Stern. These Jewish kings of finance love to stay in the background, letting their power be felt behind the scenes. Outwardly they fit right in with their hosts. They look like genuine Americans: Bernard Baruch, the Jewish financial adviser and friend of the American president, in the guise of a smart American citizen. Otto Kahn, Jewish Wall Street banker, enjoying the role as an Anglo-Saxon Lord. The Jewish banker Felix Warburg; Jewish banker Mortimer Schiff; Jewish lawyer and Germanophobe Samuel Untermeyer; Professor Felix Frankfurter, the Jewish legal adviser to the American president; Herbert Lehmann, the Jewish governor of the state of New York; La Gnardia, half-Jewish mayor of New York City; Henry Morgenthan, Jewish Secretary of the Treasury in the United States; the Jew Leon Blnm, former Prime Minister of , who knows how to act like a true Frenchman. Million of French workers honored him once as their party's leader. The Jew Hore-Belisha, former Secretary of State for War in England. English soldiers saluting their Jewish commanding officer. But the Jew remains a rootless parasite, even when in power. His power does not come from his own strength, it lasts only as tong as his misguided hosts are prepared to carry him on their backs.

Title: November 1918 those tragic days, when Germans lay helpless.

Title: Election Campaign Then the Jews seized their chance. They came to the forefront, pretending to be faithful citizens, deeply disturbed about the fate of the German people. They rushed to the so-called National Assembly in Weimar, where 's future would be decided. The Jewish representative Landsberg; on his left Scheidemann. The Jew Hirsch, Prime Minister of Prussia:, the Jew Theodor Wolff, editor of the Berliner Tageblatt',the Jew Georg Bernhard, head of the Ullstein publishing house; the Jew Hugo Preuss, creator the constitution of the German republic; The Jew Waiter Rathenau, Foreign Minister of the German republic; The Jew Hilferding, German Minister of Finance; The Jew Bernhard Isidor Weiss, assistant police chief in Berlin. Other Jews, representing the radicals, attacked every form of public order. Masquerading as selfless public benefactors, they promised great things, while inciting the masses to break the bonds of civic order. Unchecked personal freedom, rejection of all ideals, denial of every higher value. for material gain, criticism of all things sacred, revolt against everything that once existed, incitement of youth, class war and terrorism. It is no accident that this infamous doctrine, which wrecks nations, sprang from the brain of a Jew. Karl Marx, son of the rabbi and lawyer Mordechal in Treves. The founder and organizer of the German Social Democratic Party was the Jew Ferdinand Lassalle-Wolfsohn. The Jewess Rosa Luxemburg, whose real name was Emma Goldman, one of the most notorious communist agitators. The Jew Levine-Nissen, responsible for shooting hostages in the Munich of the Soviet Republic. The Jew Frankfurter was the murderer of National Socialist activist Wilhelm Gnstloff. The Polish Jew Grynszpan murdered the German diplomat vom Rath in Paris. Though a tiny minority, they knew how to terrorize a great nation. The enterprising Jews crowded into the cities. Three-quarters of all Jews lived in the cities--not to work there--that they left to the Germans. Of every thousand Berlin workers there were but two Jews. At the beginning o f 1933 there were 15 Jews out of every 100 state prosecutors in Berlin. Of every 100 judges, 23 were Jews. Forty-nine out of every 100

Der ewige ffude

63

lawyers were Jews. Fifty-three out of every 100 doctors were Jews. Of every 100 merchants, 60 were Jews. The average income of the German was 810 marks; the average income of the Jew, 10,000 marks. While millions of Germans were unemployed, immigrant Jews acquired fantastic riches in a few years. Not by honest work, but by usury, swindling, and fraud. The Sklareks relieved the Berlin treasury of 121 million. The Jew Kutisker swindled Prussia out of 14 million; the Jew Barmat defrauded the same state of 35 million. The inflation profiteer, Mendelssohn, the Jewish racketeer Katzenellenbogen, and all the others. Jews are most dangerous when they meddle in a people's culture, religion and art, and judgement on it. The Nordic concept of beauty is completely incomprehensible to the Jew and always will be. The rootless Jew has no feeling for the purity and neatness of the German idea of art.


[Music: organist plays opening of Bach's Toccata and Fugue in D Minor] What he calls art must titillate his degenerate nerves. A smell of fungus and disease must pervade it; art must be unnatural, grotesque, perverted, or pathological. These pictures, fevered fantasies of incurably sick minds, were once extolled by Jewish art critics as outstanding. These clays we find it hard to believe such pieces were once purchased by almost every state and city gallery. Jewish art dealers and Jewish artists extolled them as the only tree modern works of arts. German cultural life was niggerized and bastardized-painting, architecture, literature and music--all suffered in the same way. For more than a decade Jews wielded their pernicious power: as art dealers, music publishers, editors and critics. They decided what should he art and culture in . The Jew Kerr, the art tsar of the Weimar Republic. The Jew Tucholsky, the sick pornographer who said that treason is honorable, and that the heroic is the stupidest of all ideals. The Jew Hirschfeld, who promoted homosexuality and perversion. Under the cloak of ingenious or even learned discussion they meant to turn mankind's healthier instincts down degenerate paths. The 'relativity' Jew Einstein, who hid his hatred of behind his obscure pseudo-science. The Jew Kestenberg controlled German music in the Prussian Ministry of Culture. The E1 Dorado for Jews was the German theater. Here they ruled unchecked, degrading the classical tradition by appealing to man's lowest instincts. The Jew Haller and his revue; likewise, the Jew Nelson. The Jew Rotter, who had a monopoly of 7 theaters in Berlin, finally skipping out owing millions. The Jewish cabaret director, Robert Klein. The Jewish stage dictator, Max Reinhardt. Most theaters were directed by Jews. The Jewish comedians, Ehrlich and Morgan. In film it was no different. The Jewish film director, Richard Oswald; the comedian Gerron. The presentation of all that is disreputable and repellent for Jews becomes a subject for comedy. The Jewess Rosa Valetti. The Jew Curt Bois enjoys a particularly perverted role. The Jew Kortner-Kohn glorified a depraved officer who did not even shrink from murder. [Excerpts from film Dimitri Karomasow--Murderer; Fedor Ozep, 1931]

Narrator: The Jew is interested instinctively in all that is abnormal and depraved. He seeks to disrupt a people's healthy judgement. The Jew Lorre in the role of a child murderer. Not the murderer but the victim is guilty, according to this film, which presents the criminal sympathetically, to gloss over and excuse the crime. [Excerpts from Film M; Fritz Lang, 1932]

Peter Lorre, The Murderer: I can hear it, yes, it bums within me. I must go the way I am driven. Run, run into the main streets. I want to go away, go away. With me run the ghosts of the mothers, the children. They won't leave me in peace. They are there, there, always, always.., always, u n t i l . . , until I do it, until I . . . until I . . . Then I am conscious o f nothing. Then, then I stand in front of a poster and read what I have done and r e a d . . , read. I did that? But I know nothing o f what I have done. But who will believe me? Who knows what goes on inside me? How I have to do it, not want--but must. And then there is a scream. And I can't listen to it anymore. I can't, I can't. Narrator: A disproportionate number of culturally-prominent Jews were presented to the German public in newspapers and newsreels as distinguished representatives of German art and culture. The Jew Richard Tauber--his departure for New York was mourned as an alleged 'loss' for German art. Newsreel: Richard Tauber, departing , sings excerpt from his signature song, Lehar's Dein ist mein

ganzes Herz. Narrator: The Jew Ernst Lubitsch was hailed as a German • m producer. Newsreel: [Lubitsch]: I am very happy to be back in and especially my native city, Berlin. Narrator: The Jew Emil Ludwig Cohn was honored as a German writer. Newsreel: [Ludwig Cohn]: I believe that an author can do no better than bring honor to the German name abroad.

Narrator: The Jew Chaplin was welcomed by an enraptured throng when he visited Berlin. Germans


64

S. Hornsh#j-M#ller & D. Culbert

applauded unsuspectingly this foreign Jew, the deadly enemy of their race. How was that possible? A false dogma of human equality had misled the people's natural instinct. Several hundred years of religious education taught European Christians to consider Jews co-religionists of Christianity's founder. High-minded German painters and poets idealised the Biblical figures of Hebrew tribal history. Abraham, Isaac and Jacob were considered examples of the highest morality and humanity. Now that we have learned to use our eyes, we know the Hebrews of the Bible could not have looked this way. We must correct our historical perceptions. This is what real Hebrews look like. T h e following scenes show the Jewish festival of Purim, photographed by Warsaw Jews themselves for use in a cultural film. This harmless-looking family celebration commemorates the slaughter of 75#00 antiSemitic Persians by Biblical ancestors of our present-day Jews. The Bible says that on the next day, the Jews rested, feasting and exchanging presents. They agreed to name the two days Purim, insisting it be ed by their children's children, from one generation unto another. Educated Germans, objective and tolerant, regarded such tales as folklore or an example of some strange custom. But that is the tribe of Israel rubbing its hands and celebrating this feast of vengeance, even if the bowdlerized West European clothing conceals the Eastern origins of present-day Israelites. To understand what underlies these customs, one must look closer at the laws and teaching of the Jewish race. From childhood the Jew learns his ancient law in the Talmud school. As the Jew grows older, he learns more from books of Jewish law. But rabbis are political agitators, not peaceful theologians. The politics of a race of parasites must be carried on in secret. Nor must each individual ghetto Jew understand what is going on. It is enough to be exposed to these ideas from early childhood. What does the ancient Talmud law teach?: Always be cunning; answer politely to calm the stranger's anger so you will be loved; ally yourself with him on whom fate smiles for the moment. Canaan taught his sons five things: love one another; love pillage; love excess; hate your masters; never speak the truth. Further strengthening of Jewish inner life is carried on in the synagogue. Jews count on people not understanding their language or their strange symbols. Therefore they are willing to appear before the cameraman even at worship. The black boxes on the heads of the faithful contain ages from the law. Conducting business during the service is no mark of disrespect for the Israelites. The Torah says: He who honors the Torah will prosper in business. T h e Torah scroll, containing the five books of Moses and the Holy Law, is taken out of the so-called Holy Ark. On its way to the pulpit, Jews kiss the Torah scroll, to ask forgiveness for their sins. The Torah scroll is unrolled to the spot where it is to be read. What sorts of truths does it teach? Here are a few excerpts:

Hora Hajim, 290, Verse 1: Praise to the Lord who has set apart the holy Israelites from other peoples. The heathen, who do not keep the law, will be destroyed. God's anger is on them; He says: even the best among the heathen will I kill; there are none among the peoples of the world, who are good; they are blasphemers; but all the sons of Israel are righteous. Haghida 3, Verse 1: And the Lord said to the Israelites: you have made me the one God of the world, and I will make your people the sole ruler of the world. Hora Hajim 126, Verse 1: Glory to the eternal one, who destroys the enemies of your people, humbles and crushes them, so that the earth may belong to you alone and to your people. That is not a religion and not a religious service, it is a conspiracy against all non-Jews, by a sick, cunning, contaminated race, against the Aryan peoples and against their moral laws. [NOTE: the short version of D e ] omits what follows, and cuts to Hitler's 30 January 1939 speech]

Rolling Title: One of the most instructive customs of the Jewish so-called religion is the slaughter of animals. The following scenes are genuine. They are among the'most horrifying ever photographed. We show them in spite of objections on the grounds of taste. It is more important that our people should know the truth about Jewry.

Title: Sensitive persons are advised not to watch. [Fig. 8] Narrator: Supposedly their so-called religion prevents the Jews from eating meat butchered in the ordinary way. So they let the animals bleed to death. Jews disingenuously term this the most humane form of slaughter. European science has long acknowledged its cruelty. In 1892, following a referendum, it was forbidden in Switzerland. Jewish law has no love and regard for animals in the Germanic sense. Jews refuse to put a suffering animal out of its misery. [Fig. 9] National Socialism has fought this cruel torture of defenseless animals from its earliest days. In nearly all provincial legislatures as well as in the Reichstag they moved to forbid this type of slaughter. But the entire Jewish-controlled press called our position disgraceful.


Der ewige ffude

65

FIG. 8. Kosher butcher, Polish ghetto, Lodz. 'Supposedly their so-called religion prevents the Jews from eating meat butchered in the ordinary way. So they let the animals bleed to death.'

FIG. 9. Cow, slaughtered by kosher butcher, suffering death agonies; no anaesthesia. Title: 'Sensitive persons are advised not to watch.'

[Newspaper clippings in quick succession] Newspaper Insert: Berliner Tageblatt: 'Anti-Semitic Move to Forbid Jewish Ritual Slaughter.' Text Insert:'In the legislatures of Baden, Bavaria, and Thuringia the National Socialists have proposed that this form of animal slaughter be forbidden, as unworthy of a civilized nation. The Nazis, obsessed with anti-Semitism, do not shrink from interfering in time-honored religious customs. They claim it is cruelty to animals. But unbiased, objective experts have long proved that this form of slaughter is one of the most humane anywhere.' Newspaper insert: Tempo: 'Nazi Fantasies Against Ritual Slaughter.' Text insert: 'Explanation by Rabbis of .' Newspaper insert: Vossische Zeitung. 'The Battle Against Kosher Meat. An Objective Study by Rabbi Dr


66

S. H o r n s h ~ j - M d l l e r

& D. C u l b e r t

Engelbert. In reply to numerous queries as to whether the Kosher slaughter of animals constitutes cruelty to animals, I would like to say the following: With this form of slaughter it is really a question o f . . . ' Newspaper insert: Acht Uhr Abends: 'Stormy Meetings of the Legislative. Scientists Refute Nazi Lies.' Newspaper insert: Vomoiirts: 'Attack on Constitution Fails.' Newspaper insert: Die Rote Fahne: 'Nazi Motion Fails.' Narrator: The Jewish press could only get away with this because virtually no Germans had ever seen kosher butchering. It would otherwise have been inconceivable, considering the well-known German love of animals, that Jews until recently were able, without being punished, to torture innocent and defenseless animals. These pictures prove the cruelty of this form of slaughter. It reveals the character of a race which conceals its brutality beneath the cloak of pious religious practices. Jewish butchers usually tie the animals so no movement betrays their agonies. But sometimes animals are slaughtered unbound. As soon as the Fiihrer assumed power, a law ed on 21 April 1933, prohibited this Jewish form of slaughter. It directed that all warm-blooded animals be given anaesthesia before being slaughtered. Insert: Law of 21 April 1933, Concerning the Slaughter of Animals. Text insert: 'The Government of the Reich proclaims the following law. Paragraph 1. (1) Warm-blooded animals intended for slaughter must be anaesthetized before blood is drawn. (2) The Reich Minister of the Interior may extend this ruling to other animals.' Narrator: Just as it dealt with this cruel slaughter, so will the of National Socialism deal with the whole race of Jewry. Text insert: 'Law relating to German citizenship, 14 November 1935. Paragraph 4. (1) A Jew cannot be a citizen of the Reich. He has no right to vote; he cannot hold office.' Narrator: Jewish blood and the Jewish way of thinking will never again contaminate the German people. Text insert: [too quick to be read in its entirety by filmgoer] 'Law Concerning the Protection of German honor and German Blood, September 15 1935 . . . The purity of the German race guarantees its continuance... Paragraph 1. (1) Marriages between Jews and German nationals are forbidden.' Text insert: [too quick to be read] 'Law Concerning Act of Expiation by German Jews, November 12, 1938: The hostile attitude of Jewry towards the German people and the Reich, even condoning cowardly acts of murder, demands strong resistance and strict atonement... Paragraph 1. German Jews will pay a total contribution of one thousand million Reichsmarks to the German Reich.' Narrator: Under the leadership of Adolf Hitler, has raised the battle flag of war against the eternal Jew.

[Short version cuts to here] [Fig. 10]

FIG. 10. Hitler, addressing the Reichstag, Berlin, 30 September 1939: "Europe cannot find peace before the Jewish question is solved... Jews will just have to get used to the idea of performing some respectable constructive activity, as other people do, or sooner or later they will face trouble they never dreamed of."

Der ewige Jude

67

Newsreel Footage: Hitler speaking to Reichstag, Kroll Opera House, Berlin, 30 January, 1939: Europe cannot find peace before the Jewish question is solved. There is sufficient living space in the world, but the idea that the Jews were chosen by God Almighty to supply a certain percentage of beneficiaries living off the productive work of other races must be dispensed with. Jews will just have to get used to the idea of performing some respectable constructive activity, as other people so, or sooner or later they will face trouble they never dreamed of. Should international Jewish financiers in and outside Europe succeed in plunging the nations once more into world war, then the result will not be [the Bolshevizing of the earth and thus] the victory of Jewry, but the annihilation of the Jewish race in Europe [28]. [Cut to close-ups of Aryan types; brief excerpts from Triumph des Willens: Fig. 1l] Narrator: The eternal law of nature, to keep one's race pure, is the legacy which the National Socialist movement bequeaths to the German people forever. It is with this resolve that the unified German people march on into the future.


[Cut to Nazi flags and banners, from Triumph des Willens.] Screen black.

FIG. 11. 'Put in some Aryan faces.' The conclusion of Der ewige Jude, includes close-ups of 'typical' young Aryans, plus footage from Leni Riefenstahl's Party Rally film, Triumph des Willens.

Der Ewige Jude 3p1j

Overview 4q3b3c

More details 26j3b

Related Documents 171j1w

Der Ewige Jude 3p1j

Ewige Liebi 3m1614

Ewige Treue - Sandra Brown.pdf 2l5s4r

Jude Deveraux 3r1d5v

Jude Deveraux 3r1d5v

Hey Jude 3t73g

More Documents from "Sara Oh" 6o5v5r

Der Ewige Jude 3p1j

Jus Goyang Che Ta 5w5b1y

Nurbeautyline Soy Collagen 73486z

Mavellous True Detox Gold 1n1vl

Leading Through Change Presentation.ppt 4u5r5t

2c82t