Joseph Goebbels

Start Free Trial

Review of The Goebbels Diaries: 1942-1943

Download PDF PDF Page Citation Cite Share Link Share

SOURCE: Review of The Goebbels Diaries: 1942-1943, in The Commonweal, Vol. XLVIII, No. 11, June 25, 1948, pp. 260-62.

[In the following review, Solzbacher contends that Goebbels's diaries from 1942 and 1943 were designed to further the Nazi cause upon their publication.]

A comparison of this volume with Vom Kaiserhof zur Reichskanzlei, the diary which Dr. Joseph Goebbels published in 1934, produces two conclusions: (1) It disperses any doubts regarding the authorship of these diaries; (2) it demonstrates the absurdity of the statement on the publisher's blurb. "As he fabricated his network of lies to the German people and to the world by day, he was telling the truth to his diary by night." There is overwhelming internal evidence that Goebbels is the author of these diaries. Every page shows his style, his way of thinking, his shrewd maneuvering, his art in the distortion of facts. There is not the slightest justification for the assumption that one of the greatest liars in the world's history should have become a fanatical truth-seeker in those few minutes every day which he spent on dictating his diary.

The original, several times more voluminous than the more than 500 pages translated by Mr. Lochner, fell into American hands after a junk dealer had carted it away from the courtyard of the Berlin Ministry of Propaganda. The Russians apparently tossed these papers, with many others, out of the window, showing interest only in the filing cabinets which contained them.

Mr. Hugh Gibson, in his "Publisher's Note," mentions evidence showing that Goebbels was in debt to the Nazi Party's Publishing Company (headed by Max Amann, Hitler's drill sergeant in World War I, and owned jointly by Hitler and Amann) to the amount of 226,583.69 marks, which he had drawn as advances against future royalties. Strangely enough, neither Mr. Gibson nor Mr. Lochner seem to have noticed the obvious relationship between these debts and the Diaries. Amann was no philanthropist nor a special friend of Joseph Goebbels, but a hard-headed businessman. As he lent Goebbels money for his life of luxury and his expensive amorous adventures, he could be expected to demand payment in full. Since the Kaiserhof Diary had been the most successful of Goebbels's books, from the point of view of sales (this reviewer's copy bears the imprint "261st-280th thousand"), Amann apparently was interested in more books of this type. The writing of his diary was a chore for which Goebbels was being paid by Amann. Mr. Lochner mentions that Goebbels apparently never looked at his diary once it had been typed according to his dictation. This would seem to show that the diary was not meant to be a sentimental, "intimate" and "truthful" record for his own peace of mind, but raw material for books, one out of many tools in his quest for power, money, and fame.

Obviously Goebbels could not have planned to publish his diaries as they were, but was aware of the fact that they would have to be edited in accordance with whatever would be the party line at the time of publication. The Kaiserhof Diary, which gave a day-by-day report of events from January 1, 1932, to May 1, 1933, had shown that he was quite good at such a job. The Kaiserhof book contained vitriolic attacks against Gregor Strasser, who at the dates under which Goebbels listed his comments was still the Chief Organizer of the Nazi Party, ranking immediately after Hitler. It is quite probable that the "original" diary contained sharp criticism of Goering, Streicher, Rosenberg, Roehm, Feder, etc., as well, but that unfriendly remarks were eliminated because these leaders were riding high in the Nazi hierarchy when Goebbels published his book, while Strasser was helpless; he was assassinated by Hitler's and Goering's thugs a few weeks after the appearance of the book.

It is now known from many sources that during the war Hitler became thoroughly fed up with many of his lieutenants, including Ribbentrop, Ley, Darré, and Rosenberg, and with most of his generals. There would certainly have been a purge in the Nazi Party if Hitler had won the war. In such a case, many of the "deep secrets" in the Goebbels diaries would have been ripe for publication. On the other hand, Goebbels could not know whether Goering, whose power had been declining since 1941, would eventually be "purged" as a "traitor" or reestablished in his role as a national hero. Goebbels was prepared for both possibilities, mingling in his diaries praise and basest flattery with criticism and ridicule. By blue-penciling either the former or the latter, Goebbels could easily adapt the diary to whatever would be required at the time of publication.

The fact that the diaries contain nothing but praise and admiration for Hitler does not necessarily prove anything about the intimate thoughts of the author. It merely shows that Goebbels knew that his fate was inextricably linked with that of the founder of the Nazi movement and that, in the case of Hitler's defeat, his own career would be finished.

The best proof that these diaries are not an "intimate" and "truthful" record of the author's life and innermost thoughts is furnished by the fact that all through these hundreds of pages Goebbels plays the comedy of a faithful husband and father while in fact his love affairs with a number of women, including the film star Lyda Barova, were notorious and he lived mostly separated from his wife. Any mention of Hitler's Eva Braun is also avoided in the diaries.

Many of the "revelations" of these diaries are undoubtedly true. Some Nazi schemes are described with remarkable frankness, e. g. Hitler's plans to annex large parts of France, especially Burgundy, and Goebbels's proposal to annex large parts of Italy, especially Venice. In some matters, Goebbels apparently was more realistic than other Nazis, for instance when he demanded more food and clothing for the slave laborers (to make them cooperative), when he suggested in vain, against Rosenberg's violent opposition, that people in the Nazi-occupied parts of the Soviet Union be offered land and freedom of religion (to win them for the German cause), and when he opposed Hitler's plan to have German troops occupy Vatican City (because of the indignation which this would stir up all over the world).

On the other hand, the diaries contain entries which are obviously false, for instance the one on March 3, 1943: "I learn that the Pope intends to enter upon negotiations with us. He would like to get into contact with us and would even be willing to send incognito to Germany one of the Cardinals with whom he is intimate."

Goebbels boasts in the diaries that he deliberately "planted" items of false information in the German and foreign press. There are indications that he used his diaries for the same purpose. That Mr. Lochner has not remained completely immune against such attempts, may be seen from his comment on p. 252: "The Mr. Cohn here referred to is better known by his pen name of Emil Ludwig. " In reality, Mr. Ludwig's father changed his name to Ludwig in 1883, when Emil Ludwig was 2 years old. It has been his legitimate name ever since.

In his Introduction as well, Mr. Lochner appears to have been too much impressed by Goebbels's boastfulness, for instance when he writes: "He spoke night after night, edited his paper, attended to a multitude of details of political organization, and still found time with Gregor Strasser to start the National-Sozialistische Briefe (National Socialist Letters)." This is legend, not history. When the semi-monthly Briefe was founded (July 1925), Goebbels had no paper to edit and had few speaking engagements; organizational matters were attended to by his boss, Gregor Strasser. Mr. Lochner's reference to a "Goebbels-Strasser duumvirate" is greatly exaggerated. Goebbels was Strasser's employee. Only after his break with Strasser and his entrance into Hitler's service was Goebbels given organizational assignments. One of the reasons for which Hitler sent him to Berlin in November, 1928, was the fact that he knew Gregor and Otto Strasser and could be expected to keep an eye on their activities in Berlin where they were publishing at that time a chain of 7 Nazi weeklies, among them the Berliner Arbeiterzeituna, following a "socialist" line.

The Introduction and the notes for this book have obviously been prepared in a hurry. I did not try to count the inaccuracies, but their total is undoubtedly very high. To give just a few examples: It is not correct that the Nazi SD (Security Service) was part of the Gestapo (it was part of the SS storm troops), that ex-Gauleiter Kube was "one of Hitler's earliest disciples" (he fought the Nazis as a member of a rival racist group until he joined them in 1927), that De Valera became Prime Minister of Ireland in 1937 (the correct year is 1932). Walther Rathenau was no von. The palace on Peacock Island, where Mr. Lochner attended a Venetian Night organized by Goebbels, cannot possibly have been "erected in 1794 for Frederick William III" (who ascended the throne only 3 years later). It seems very unlikely that Mr. Lochner had the talk with Captain Roehm, which he describes, in 1930, because Roehm spent that entire year in Bolivia, returning to Germany only in January, 1931. Most of these inaccuracies are unimportant in themselves, but their large number impairs the value of the book.

Many of the notes produce confusion rather than clarification. On p. 419, for instance, where Goebbels describes a conversation with Himmler about the conscientious objectors among the International Bible Students, the only comment needed would have been that the sect is now known in its country of origin, America, as Jehovah's Witnesses. Mr. Lochner, however, states: "The International Bible Students were a small sect claiming to be serious searchers into the verities of Holy Script. " Has he never heard of Jehovah's Witnesses?

In the Introduction, Mr. Lochner mentions several of Goebbels's books, omitting, however, the most important one, and the only one in diary form, Vom Kaiserhof zur Reichskanzlei.

Unquestionably the Goebbels Diaries are of immense interest for students of history. In the perspective of recent events, most of the falsehood which they contain is obvious for everyone. Such is not the case for all of it, however. The critical reader will do well to keep in mind that he is handling poison.

Get Ahead with eNotes

Start your 48-hour free trial to access everything you need to rise to the top of the class. Enjoy expert answers and study guides ad-free and take your learning to the next level.

Get 48 Hours Free Access
Next

Introduction

Loading...