Geraubte Diamanten, Schmuck und Edelmetalle

The essay explores the role of gemstone merchants, jewelers and goldsmiths in the expropriation of diamonds, jewellery and precious stones from the Jewish population of Germany as well as German-occupied countries in the Nazi era. Their participation along with the possibility for them to profit from these efforts will be highlighted, and it will be shown in how far there is proof for the involvement of specific persons. Due to their changeable nature, many of the stolen pieces of jewellery are nigh impossible to trace. For this reason, the essay narrows its focus on individual gemstone merchants, jewellers and goldsmiths to gain insight into their involvement in the robbery. Structures and regulations that were exploited to this end can be observed on an administrative level, in responsible administrative bodies and in the administration of occupied territories. In addition, implementation methods can also be reconstructed, i. e. which middlemen the National Socialists made use of within the circle of gemstone merchants, jewellers and goldsmiths. It shows that all three levels – trade, handicrafts, and sales – benefited from the robbery. On the one hand, jewellers and goldsmiths were used as henchmen for the procurement and evaluation of gemstones, on the other hand, some of these goldsmiths took advantage of the sales orders placed by the National Socialists and obtained the necessary gems and precious stones and metals via the established networks. A scheme in which all participants systematically benefited from the robbery of Jewish property can be identified. Within the framework of foreign currency supply, military raw diamond demand and satisfaction of the Nazi art needs, the participation in the robbery seems limited to an elitist group of gemstone merchants, jewellers and goldsmiths, who were also closely linked to the Nazi elite. In how far the remaining, much larger group of jewellers were actively involved in the robbery of Jewish property remains a question to be answered by further research.

Hubert Simon (Jim) Markl. 17 August 1938—8 January 2015

Hubert (Jim) Markl was a zoologist and animal behavioural physiologist; but, beyond that, he was arguably the most influential figure in European science policy and the key person influencing the relationship between science and society in Germany. He uniquely served as president of both the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (German Science Foundation) and the Max Planck Gesellschaft. In these roles he was an outstanding and bold advocate for scientific research in Germany and throughout Europe, and his astute judgement, cogency and intellectual rigour commanded the respect of all his peers. His occupancy of the two most senior positions in German science policy followed from his earlier substantial scientific contributions to the emerging discipline of behavioural ecology, as well as his books on science, society and culture. Markl was a leading spokesperson in Germany on contested issues at the interface between science and society; for example, he was an eloquent advocate of stem cell research, speaking out against the political mainstream. He also strove to expose fully, and acknowledge, the Max Planck Society's responsibility for atrocities committed by the Kaiser Wilhelm Gesellschaft scientists during the Nazi era; Markl will be remembered as the president who oversaw a historical analysis of the involvement of the Kaiser Wilhelm Gesellschaft (the scientific society that legally preceded the Max Planck Gesellschaft), and in 2001 he apologized in the name of the Max Planck Society for the expulsion and deaths of Jewish scientists.

Correction to: Hans Asperger, National Socialism, and “race hygiene” in Nazi-era Vienna

An amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via the original article.

Audiovisual Production by the Contemporary European Extreme Right: Filmic Inheritances and Intertexts to Spread the Hate

This article analyses the narrative techniques of major far-right political parties in contemporary Europe, based on their promotional videos on YouTube. It argues that the construction of their discourse is based mainly on cinematic references that connect with both the post-modern epic and the propaganda machinery of the Third Reich. Their visual motifs are thus positioned on two intertextual axes: post-classical cinema and Nazi propaganda. To support this hypothesis, a qualitative methodology of discourse analysis is applied, with special emphasis on the textual analysis of both formal features (staging, framing, and editing) and thematic content (the political messages conveyed). After offering a brief outline of the current state of the dissemination of right-wing extremist messages on YouTube, the article examines a sample of 53 of the most important institutional videos by the 12 far-right parties that have been most successful in their respective national elections. The results confirm that their visual motifs evoke three of the most characteristic fields of signification of the extreme right: the construction of the leader, the idea of nation, and the creation of an external enemy. In all three cases, a series of images is used with the aim of both captivating the audience with historical-military references and appropriating stylistic features from the nationalist iconography of the Heimat, which inspired many of the UFA films of the Nazi era.