ERNST NOLTE
- + Add to Faves
- + Translate
- + Share
ۧÙŰč۱ۚÙŰ©
äžćœ
Français
Deutsch
ÎλληΜÎčÎșÎź
à€čà€żà€šà„à€Šà„
Italiano
æ„æŹèȘ
PortuguĂȘs
Đ ŃŃŃĐșĐžĐč
Español
'Ernst Nolte' (born 11 January 1923, Witten, Germany) is a German historian and philosopher, often described as one of the "most brooding, German thinkers about history"[1]. Nolteâs major interest is the comparative studies of fascism and Communism. His work has been the object of extreme controversy.
Born in Witten, Germany to a Roman Catholic family, Nolte's father, was a school rector[2]. Nolte's parents were Heinrich and Anna (nee Bruns) Nolte[2]. In 1941, Nolte was excused from military service because of a deformed hand, and he studied Philosophy, Philology and Greek at the Universities of MĂŒnster, Berlin, and Freiburg. At Freiburg, Nolte was a student of Martin Heidegger, who was a major influence on Nolte[4]. From 1944 onwards, Nolte has been a close friend of the Heidegger family, and when in 1945, Heidegger feared arrest by the French, Nolte provided Heidegger with food and laundry when Heidegger attempted to escape[5]. Another professor who influenced Nolte was Eugen Fink. After 1945 when Nolte received his BA in philosophy at Freiburg, Nolte worked as an ''Gymnasium'' (high school) teacher. In 1952, he received a PhD in philosophy at Freiburg for his thesis ''Selbstentfremdung und Dialektik im deutschen Idealismus und bei Marx'' (''Self Alienation and Dialectic in German idealism and Marx''). Subsequently, Nolte began studies in ''Zeitgeschichte'' (contemporary history), and published his ''Habilitationsschrift'' awarded at the University of Cologne, ''Der Faschismus in seiner Epoche'' as a book in 1963. Between 1965-1973, Nolte worked as a professor at the University of Marburg, and from 1973-1991 at the Free University of Berlin. Nolte's wife is Annedore Mortier[2] and their son, Georg Nolte is a professor of international law at the University of Munich.
Nolte first rose to fame with his 1963 book ''Der Faschismus in seiner Epoche'' (''Fascism In Its Epoch''; translated into English in 1965 as ''The Three Faces Of Fascism''), in which Nolte argued that fascism arose as a form of resistance to and a reaction against modernity. Nolte's basic hypothesis and methodology were deeply rooted in the German "philosophy of history" tradition, a form of Intellectual history which seeks to discover the "metapolitical dimension" of history[7]. The "metapolitical dimension" is considered to the history of those grand ideas, which function as a profound spiritual power, infusing every aspect of the multi-layered levels of society with their force[7]. In Nolte's opinion, only those with training in philosophy can discover the "metapolitical dimension", and those who use normal historical methods miss this dimension of time[7]. Using the methods of phenomenology, Nolte subjected German Nazism, Italian Fascism and the French Action Française movements to a comparative analysis. Nolteâs conclusion was that fascism was the great anti-movement; namely it was anti-liberal, anti-communist, anti-capitalist, and anti-bourgeois. In Nolteâs view, fascism was the rejection of everything the modern world had to offer and was an essentially negative phenomenon[10]. In an Hegelian dialectic, Nolte argued that the ''Action Française'' was the thesis, Italian Fascism was the antithesis, and German National Socialism the synthesis of the two earlier fascist movements[11]. Nolte argued that fascism functioned at three levels; in the world of politics as a form of opposition to Marxism, at the sociological level as opposition to the values of bourgeois society, and finally in the âmetapoliticalâ world, where fascism functioned as âresistance to transcendenceâ ("Transcendence" in German can be translated as the "spirit of modernity")[12]. Nolte defined "transcendence" as a "metapolitical" force comprising two types of change[13]. The first type being "practical transcendence" as manifested in material progress, technological change, political equality, social advancement, and comprises the process, in which humanity liberates itself from traditional, hierarchical societies in favor of societies where all men and all women are equal[14]. The second type is "theoretical transcendence", which is the attainment of the mind to go further than what exists in the world today towards what can exist in the future, and comprises the process in which humanity removes all of the traditional fetters imposed on the human mind by poverty, backwardness, ignorance, and class[14]. Drawing upon the work of Max Weber, Friedrich Nietzsche, and Karl Marx, Nolte argued that as both types of "transcendence" advance, this progress generates fear as the older world is swept aside by a new world, and that it was these fears that led to fascism[16]. In regards to the Holocaust, Nolte contended that because Adolf Hitler identified Jews with modernity, the basic thrust of Nazi policies towards Jews had always aimed at genocide[17]. In Nolte's famous phrase, "Auschwitz was contained in the principles of Nazi racist theory like the seed in the fruit"[18]. ''The Three Faces of Fascism'' was much praised at the time and since as a seminal contribution to the creation of a theory of generic fascism based on an history of ideas, as opposed to the previous class-based analysisâs (especially the "Rage of the Lower Middle Class" thesis) that had characterized both Marxist and liberal interpretations of fascism [10]. Roger Griffin has written that although written in an excessively arcane and obscure language, Nolte's theory of fascism as a âform of resistance to transcendenceâ marked an important step in the understanding of fascism, and helped to spur scholars into new avenues of research on fascism[20].
Other historians were more hostile in their assessement of ''The Three Faces of Fascism''. Criticism from the left centered on Nolte's focus on ideas as opposed to social and economic conditions as a motivating force for fascism, and that Nolte depended too much on the fascist writings to make support his thesis[13]. From the right, historians such as Karl Dietrich Bracher criticized the entire notion of generic fascism as intellectually invalid and argued that it was individual choice on the part of Germans as opposed to Nolte's philosophical view of the "metapolitical" that produced National Socialism[22]. Bracher's ''magnum opus'', his 1969 book ''Die deutsche Diktatur'' (''The German Dictatorship'') was partly written to rebut Nolte's theory of generic fascism, and instead presented a picture of the National Socialist dictatorship as a totalitarian regime created and sustained by human actions[23]. Together with the work of Eugen Weber, ''The Three Faces of Fascism'' was one of the first books that devoted an extensive study of the ultra-nationalist and anti-Semitic ''Action Française'' movement of France, but many have questioned Nolteâs claim that the ''Action Française'' was a fascist movement, or in the case of John Lukacs, whatever such a thing as generic fascism ever existed[24].
As a professor at the University of Marburg in the late 1960s, Nolte was the target of student protestors, an experience that left him with a strong distaste for the West German left[25]. For a time in the 1960s, all of Nolte's classes were boycotted by radical students, who demanded Nolte's dismissal, an experience that some such as John Lukacs and Charles Maier have credited with Nolte's radical change of views about the National Socialist period[26]. Later in the 1970s, Nolte was to reject the theory of generic fascism that he had championed in ''The Three Faces of Fascism'' and instead embraced totalitarian theory as a way of explaining both Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union. In Nolte's opinion, Nazi Germany was a "mirror image" of the Soviet Union and with the exception of the âtechnical detailâ of mass gassing everything the Nazis in Germany did, the Communists in Russia did first[27].
All of Nolteâs historical work has been heavily influenced by German traditions of philosophy[28]. In particular, Nolte seeks to find the total essences of the âmetapolitical phenomenonâ of history, to discover the grand ideas which motivated all of history, and as such, Nolteâs work has been oriented towards the general as opposed to the specific attributes of a particular period of time[29]. In his 1974 book, ''Deutschland und der kalte Krieg'' (''Germany and the Cold War''), Nolte examined the partition of Germany after 1945 less by looking at the specific history of the Cold War and Germany, and more by examining other divided states throughout history, and treated the German partition as the supreme culmination of the "metapolitical" idea of partition caused by rival ideologies[30]. In Nolte's view, the division of Germany made that nation the world's central battlefield between Soviet Communism and American democracy, both of which were rival streams of the "transcendence" that had vanished the Third Reich, the ultimate enemy of "transcendence"[31]. As such, Nolte treats the history of ideas with little interest to the specific historical context of the ideas, and more by seeking what Carl Schmitt labelled the abstract "final" or "ulimate" end of an idea, which for Nolte are the most extreme conclusions which can be drawn from an idea, and represents the ''ultima terminus'' of the "metapolitical"[30]. For Nolte, ideas have a force of their own, and once a new idea is introduced into the world, except for the total destruction of society, it can not longer be ignored any more than the invention of nuclear weapons and the discovery of how to make fire can be rolled back[33]. In Nolte's view, Communism by introducing the idea of a total destruction of a particular group was the most important idea of the 20th century[34]. Together with such historians as François Furet and Renzo De Felice, both of whom Nolte sometimes corresponded with, Nolte has sought to develop a wide-ranging paradigm capable of explaining (or Nolteâs words âunderstandingâ) the 20th century.
Nolte is best known for his role in launching the ''Historikerstreit'' (Historianâs Dispute) of 1986-1987. On June 6, 1986 Nolte published an article entitled ''Vergangenheit, die nicht vergehen will: Eine Rede, die geschrieben, aber nicht mehr gehalten werden konnte'' ("''The Past That Will Not Go Away: A Speech That Could Be Written but Not Delivered''") in the ''Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung''. His article was a distillation of ideas that Nolte had first introduced in lectures that he delivered in 1976 and in 1980. Earlier in 1986, Nolte had planned to deliver a speech before the Frankfurt Römerberg Conversations, but the organizers of the event withdrew their invitation[35]. In response, the editor of the ''Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung'', Joachim Fest allowed Nolte to have his speech printed as an article in his newspaper[36]. In his article, Nolte advanced the view that the crimes of the Nazis were only a defensive reaction against the crimes of the Soviets. In Nolteâs view, National Socialism had only arisen in response to the âclass genocideâ and âAsiatic barbarismâ of the Bolsheviks"[37]. Nolte cited the example of the early Nazi Max Erwin von Scheubner-Richter, who during World War I had been the German consul in Erzerum, Turkey and was appalled by the genocide of the Armenians; in Nolte's view, the fact that Scheuber-Richter later on became a Nazi shows that something must have changed his values, and in Nolte's opinion, it was the Russian Revolution and such alleged Bolshevik practices as the "rat cage" torture (said by Russian Ă©migrĂ© authors to be a favorite torture by Chinese serving in the Cheka during the Russian Civil War) that led to the change [38]. Along the same lines, Nolte argued that the Holocaust, or "racial genocide" as Nolte prefers to call it, was an understandable if excessive response on the part of Adolf Hitler to the Soviet threat. In Nolte's view, Soviet mass murder were ''Vorbild'' (the example that inspired the Nazis) and ''Schreckbild'' (the horrific model)[39]. Nolte labeled the Holocaust an "''ĂŒberschieĂende Reaktion''" (overshooting reaction) to Bolshevik crimes, and to alleged Jewish actions in support of Germany's enemies[39].
As proof of this argument of the Holocaust as a defensive reaction, Nolte presented a letter written by Chaim Weizmann, the President of the World Zionist Organization on September 3, 1939 to the British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain pledging full and unconditional support to the British war effort. Nolte has called Weizmann's letter to Chamberlain a "Jewish declaration of warâ against Germany"[41] (see also "Judea Declares War on Germany"). The second piece of evidence Nolte presented was a book written in 1940 by the American author Theodore N. Kaufman called ''Germany Must Perish!'' that appealed to have all German men sterilized. Nolte argued that the Nazis felt forced to stage the Holocaust because Hitler concluded that entire Jewish population of the world had declared war on Germany. From Nolteâs point of view, the Holocaust was act of âAsiatic barbarismâ forced on the Germans out of the fear over what Joseph Stalin, who Nolte charged had significant Jewish support, might do to them. Nolte has argued that after the Japanese attack on the United States in 1941, the U.S. authorities interned the entire Japanese-American population, so by the same logic, the Germans were within their rights to "intern" the Jewish population of Europe in concentration camps"[42].
Subsequently, Nolte expanded upon these views in his 1987 book ''Der europĂ€ische BĂŒrgerkrieg, 1917-1945'' (''The European Civil War, 1917-1945'') in which he claimed that the entire 20th century was an age of genocide, totalitarianism, and tyranny, and that the Holocaust had been merely one chapter in the age of violence, terror and population displacement. Nolte claimed that this age had started with the genocide of the Armenians during World War I, and also included the Stalinist terror in the Soviet Union, the explusion of ethnic Germans from Eastern Europe, Maoist terror in China as manifested in such events as the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution, compulsory population exchanges between Greece and Turkey in 1922-1923, and the Khmer Rouge genocide in Cambodia. In Nolte's view, the great deciding event of the 20th century had been the Russian Revolution of 1917, which in Nolte's view, plunged all of Europe into a long-simmering civil war that lasted until 1945. In Nolte's opinion, fascism, which was Communism's twin, arose as a desperate response by the threatened middle classes of Europe to what Nolte has often called the âBolshevik perilâ[43]. In a marked change from the views expressed in ''The Three Faces of Fascism'', in which Communism was a stream of âtranscendenceâ, Nolte now classified communism together with fascism as both rival streams of the âresistance to transcendenceâ[44]. The âmetapolitical phenomenonâ of Communism led to in an Hegelian dialectic to the âmetapolitical phenomenonâ of fascism, which was both a copy of and the most ardent opponent of Marxism[45]. As an example of his thesis, Nolte cited an article written in 1927 by Kurt Tucholsky calling for middle-class Germans to be gassed, which in Nolte's view, was much more deplorable then the celebratory comments made by some right-wing newspapers about the assassination of the German Foreign Minister Walter Rathenau in 1922[46].
These views ignited a firestorm of controversy. Most historians in West Germany and virtually all historians outside Germany condemned Nolteâs interpretation as factually incorrect, and as coming dangerously close to justifying the Holocaust[47]. Many historians such as Steven T. Katz claimed that Nolteâs âAge of Genocideâ concept âtrivializedâ the Holocaust by reducing it down to one of just many genocides of the 20th century. Further adding to the controversy was an statement by Nolte in June 1987 that Adolf Hitler "created the state of Israel", and that "âŠthe Jews would eventually come to appreciate Hitler as the individual who contributed more than anyone else to the creation of the state of Israel".[48].As a result of that remark, Nolte was sacked from his position as chief editor of the German language edition of Theodore Herzl's letters by the ''Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft'' (German Research Community), the group that was responsible for the financing of the Herzl papers project.[48].
The philosopher JĂŒrgen Habermas in an article in the ''Die Zeit'' newspaper on July 11, 1986 entitled âA Kind of Settlement of Damagesâ strongly criticized Nolte together with Andreas Hillgruber and Michael StĂŒrmer for engaging in Habermas called âapologeticâ history writing in regards to the Nazi era, and for seeking to âclose Germanyâs opening to the Westâ that in Habermasâs view had existed since 1945.[50].. In particular, Habermas took Nolte to task for suggesting a moral equivalence between the Holocaust and the Khmer Rouge genocide. In Habermasâs opinion, since Cambodia was a backward, Third World agrarian state and Germany in a modern, First World industrial state, there was no comparison between the two genocides. In response, Fest, who was one of Nolteâs leading defenders, called Habermas a racist for suggesting that it was ânaturalâ for Cambodians to engage in genocide, and âunnaturalâ for Germans to engage in genocide.
Some of the historians who denounced Nolteâs views included Hans Mommsen, JĂŒrgen Kocka, Detlev Peukert, Martin Broszat, Hans-Ulrich Wehler, Michael Wolffsohn, Heinrich August Winkler, Wolfgang Mommsen, Karl Dietrich Bracher and Eberhard JĂ€ckel. In addition, Nolte faced criticism from the publisher Rudolf Augstein, who accused Nolte of creating the "New Auschwitz Lie"[51]. Much (through not all) of the criticism of Nolte came from historians who favored either the ''Sonderweg'' (''Special Way'') and/or intentionlist/functionalist interpretations of German history. From the advocates of the ''Sonderweg'' approach came the criticism that Nolteâs views had totally externalized the origins of the National Socialist dictatorship to the post-1917 period, whereas in their view, the roots of the Nazi dictatorhsip can be traced back to the 19th century Second Reich. In particular, it was argued that within the virulently anti-Semitic Völkisch movement, which first arose in the latter half of the 19th century, the ideological seeds of genocide were already planted. From both functionalist and intentionist historians came the similar criticism that the motives and momentum for the âFinal Solution to the Jewish Questionâ came primarily from within Germany, not as the result of external events. Intentionlists argued that Hitler did not need the Russian Revolution to provide him with a genocidal mindset, while functionalists argued it was the unstable power structure and bureaucratic rivalries of the Third Reich, which led to genocide of the Jews. Eberhard JĂ€ckel argued that Nolte's theory was ahistorical under the grounds that Hitler held the Soviet Union in contempt, and could not have felt threatened as Nolte claimed[52]. Hans Mommsen accused Nolte of attempting to "relativize" Nazi crimes[53] while his twin brother Wolfgang charged that Nolte was attempting to egregiously white-wash the German past[54]. Martin Broszat labelled Nolte an obnoxious crank[55]. Hans-Ulrich Wehler was so enraged by Nolte's views that he wrote a book ''Entsorgung der deutschen Vergangenheit?: ein polemischer Essay zum "Historikerstreit'' (''Exoneration of the German Past?: A Polemical Essay about the 'Historikerstreit') in 1988, which as its title indicated comprised a lengthy polemicial essay attacking every aspect of Nolte's views. Criticism from abroad came from Ian Kershaw, Gordon A. Craig, Richard J. Evans, Saul FriedlĂ€nder, John Lukacs, Michael Marrus, and Timothy Mason.
Coming to Nolte's defence were the journalist Joachim Fest, and the historians Klaus Hildebrand, Rainer Zitelmann and Hagen Schulze. Hildebrand praised Nolte for daring to open up new questions for research[56]. Fest claimed that Nolte's argument that Nazi crimes were not singular was correct[57]. Nolte for his part, started to write a series of letters to various newspapers such as ''Die Zeit'' and ''Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung'' attacking his critics; for an example, in a letter to ''Die Zeit'' on August 1, 1986, Nolte complained that his critic JĂŒrgen Habermas of attempting to censor him for expressing his views[58]. One of Nolte's letters created another controversy in late 1987, when the Israeli historian Otto Dov Kulka complained that a letter he wrote to Nolte criticizing his views was edited by Nolte to make him appear sympathetic to Nolte's arguments, and then released to the press[59]. In 1987, Nolte wrote an entire book responding to his critics both German and foreign, ''Das Vergehen der Vergangenheit : Antwort an meine Kritiker im sogenannten Historikerstreit'' (''The Offense Of The Past: Answer At My Critics In The So-Called Historians' Dispute''). Perhaps the most extreme response to Nolte's thesis occurred on February 9, 1988 when was his car was burned by a group of extreme leftists[60].
The ''Historikerstreit'' attracted much media attention in West Germany, and as a result, both Nolte and his opponents became frequent guests on West German radio and television. The ''Historikerstreit'' was characterized by a highly vitriolic tone, with both Nolte and his supporters and their opponents often resorting to vicious and savage personal attacks on each other[61]. Abroad, the ''Historikerstreit'', to a somewhat lesser extend brought a degree of fame to Nolte. In 1987, concerns about some of the claims being made by both sides in the ''Historikerstreit'' led to a conference being called in London that was attended by some of the leading British, American, Israeli, and German specialists in both Soviet and German history. Among those who attended included Sir Ralf Dahrendorf, Sir Isaiah Berlin, Lord Weidenfeld, Harold James, Carol Gluck, Lord Annan, Fritz Stern, Gordon A. Craig, Robert Conquest, Samuel Ettinger, JĂŒrgen Kocka, Sir Nicholas Henderson, Eberhard JĂ€ckel, Hans Mommsen, Michael StĂŒrmer, Joachim Fest, Hagen Schulze, Christian Maier, Wolfgang Mommsen, Hugh Trevor-Roper, Saul FriedlĂ€nder, Felix Gilbert, Norman Stone, Julius Schoeps, and Charles Maier[62]. Nolte was invited to the conference, but declined, citing scheduling conflicts.
Nolteâs opponents have expressed intense disagreement with his evidence for a Jewish "war" on Germany. They argue that Weizmannâs letter to Chamberlain was written in his capacity as head of the World Zionist Organization, not on behalf of the entire Jewish people of the world [63] and that Nolteâs views are based on the spurious idea that all Jews comprised a distinct "nationality" who take their marching orders from Jewish organizations[63]. Furthermore, it has been contended that there is no evidence that Hitler ever heard of Weizmannâs letter to Chamberlain, and that it was natural for Weizmann, an British Jew to declare his support for his country against a fiercely anti-Semitic regime[65]. As for Kaufmanâs book, the Nazis were certainly aware of it; during the war, ''Germany Must Perish!'' was translated into German and widely promoted as an example of what Jews thought about Germans. But most historians contended that the radical views of one American Jew can in no way be taken as typical of what all European Jews were thinking, and to put the call for the forced sterilization of Germans that was never carried out as Allied policy in the same league as the Holocaust shows a profound moral insensitivity[66]. Moreover, it has been shown that there is no indication that the Kaufman's book ever played any role in the decision-making progress that led to the Holocaust[67]. Finally, it has been contended that Nolte's comparison of the Holocaust with the internment of the Japanese-Americans is false, because the Jews of Europe were sent to death camps, not concentration camps and that the U.S. government did not attempt to exterminate the Japanese-Americans in the internment camps[68].
Nolteâs critics have frequently charged him with having neo-Nazi and anti-Semitic sympathies. Nolte has always vehemently denied these charges, and has insisted that he is a neo-liberal in his politics. Nolte is by his own admission, an intense German nationalist and his stated goal is to restore the sense of pride in their history that he feels the Germans have been missing since 1945. Above all, Nolte is opposed to any sort of ''Sonderweg'' interpretation of German history. In Nolte's view, the roots of National Socialism are only to be understood as an "...reaction born out of the anxiety of the annihilating occurrence of the Russian Revolution"[69], and lacked any connection with pre-1917 German history. Nolteâs defenders have pointed to numerous statements on his part condemning Nazi Germany and the Holocaust. Nolteâs critics have acknowledged these statements, but go on to claim that Nolte makes arguments that can be construed as being sympathetic to the Nazis such as his defence of the Commissar Order as a legitimate military order, his argument that the ''Einsatzgruppen'' massacres of Soviet Jews were a reasonable "preventive security" response to partisan attacks, his statements citing Viktor Suvorov that Operation Barbarossa was an "preventive war" forced on Hitler by an alleged impeding Soviet attack, his claim that too much scholarship on the ''Shoah'' has been done by "biased" Jewish historians or his use of Nazi-era language such as Nolte's practice of referring to the Red Army soldiers in World War II as âAsiatic hordesâ[70]. Many British and American historians have been angered by Nolte's statements that there was no moral difference between British "area bombing" of German cities in World War II and American war crimes in the Vietnam War and Nazi war crimes[71]. Many have charged that Nolteâs argument was meant to create a moral equivalence between British âarea bombingâ, American war crimes in Vietnam such as the My Lai Massacre and the ''Shoah''.
In particular, controversy has centered around an argument that Nolte made in his 1985 essay âBetween Myth and Revisionismâ from the book ''Aspects of the Third Reich'', first published in German as ''"Die negative Lebendigkeit des Dritten Reiches"'' (''"The Negative Legend of the Third Reich"'') as an opinion piece in the ''Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung'' on July 24, 1980[72]. In his essay Nolte argued that if the PLO were to destroy Israel, then the subsequent history written in the new Palestinian state would portray the former Israeli state in the blackest of colors[73]. In Nolteâs opinion, a similar situation with history written only by the victors exists in regards to the history of Nazi Germany[73]. Many historians such as the British historian Richard J. Evans have claimed that by making this argument Nolte is attempting to claim that the only reason why Nazism is seen is evil is because Germany lost World War II, not because of the Holocaust[75]. Another line of criticism has centered around Nolte's frequent, and heavy use of the work of the British historian David Irving to support his arguments[76].
Nolte has always denied these allegations of Nazi sympathies. Likewise, Nolte has pointed out that he always refused frequent offers to speak at the gatherings of the Institute for Historical Review; Nolte's critics such as Deborah Lipstadt have charged that the nature of Nolte's arguments about the Holocaust such as his suggestion in ''Der europĂ€ische BĂŒrgerkrieg'' that the Wannsee Conference may not have occurred has led to these frequent invitations to speak at the I.H.R.[77]. Likewise, Nolte has often vehemently criticized the laws banning Holocaust denial in Germany as a violation of free speech, and has called for their repeal. Lipstadt has argued that in her view the nature of Nolte's work is a more insidious and dangerous form of Holocaust denial than the work of David Irving. In a 2003 interview, Lipstadt was quoted as saying "Historians such as the German Ernst Nolte are, in some ways, even more dangerous than the deniers. Nolte is an anti-Semite of the first order, who attempts to rehabilitate Hitler by saying that he was no worse than Stalin; but he is careful not to deny the Holocaust. Holocaust deniers make Nolte's life more comfortable. They have, with their radical argumentation, pulled the center a little more to their side. Consequently, a less radical extremist, such as Nolte, finds himself closer to the middle ground, which makes him more dangerous"[78]. Through Nolte has never denied the Holocaust, he has often praised the work of David Irving, David Hoggan, Fred Leuchter, Arthur Butz, Paul Rassinier and other Holocaust deniers as superior to the work of "mainstream" scholars; in 1993 Nolte wrote that "radical revisionists have presented research which, if one is familiar with the source material and the critique of the sources, is probably superior to that of the established historians of Germany"[79].
In 1992, Nolte again attracted controversy with a biography of his mentor, Martin Heidegger, whose turn to Nazism in the early 1930s was justified by Nolte under the grounds that in the context of the times, support for Nazis was a "rational" choice for a German to make[5]. Nolte argued that Heidegger was "''gerechtfertiger''" (justified) in joining the N.S.D.A.P. as in Nolte's view the only other alternative was the K.P.D.[81]. In April 1993, an exchange took place on the pages of the ''New York Review of Books'' between Thomas Sheehan and Nolte over the formerâs hostile review of Nolteâs biography of Heidegger. Nolte protested that Sheehan misquoted and misinterpreted some of his statements[82]. Sheehan in response to state that Nolte had deliberately engaged in selective misquotation of his review[82]. Perhaps in jest, Nolte described himself in his letter of protest as an âwicked revisionistâ[82].
Another controversy around Nolte was caused in 1994 when Nolte made a speech that maintained that there was much that was âpositiveâ about National Socialism, and that in his opinion, unfortunately too many historians had neglected the "positive" aspects of Nazism[85]. Since the ''Historikerstreit'', Nolte has became an increasing marginalized figure within the German historical profession. The reception on the part of most historians to his 1991 book ''Geschichtsdenken im 20. Jahrhundert'' (''Historical Thinking In the 20th Century'') was very hostile at best. In the latter work, Nolte asserted that the 20th century produced three âextraordinary statesâ, namely the Germany, Soviet Union, and Israel. Nolte claimed that all three âabnormal onceâ, but whereas the Soviet Union and Germany were now ânormalâ states, Israel was still an âabnormalâ state and was in Nolteâs view, in danger of becoming a fascist state that might commit genocide against the Palestinians. Many criticized Nolteâs book as both anti-Semitic and anti-Israeli, with its implied conclusion that there is a moral equivalence between Soviet Communism, German National Socialism and Israeli democracy. Another controversial work by Nolte was his 1998 book ''Historische Existenz''
(''Historical Existence''). An prominent theme of the latter book was a restatement of Nolte's view first expressed during the ''Historikerstreit'', that because a disproportionate number of Soviet partisans were Jews, the ''Einsatzgruppen'' massacres, which saw one million Soviet Jews shot in 1941-1942 were an acceptable counter-insurgency tactic that should not be regarded as either an war crime or an crime against humanity.
Between 1995-1997, Nolte via a series of letters had a debate with French historian François Furet over the relationship between fascism and Communism. The debate had been started by a footnote in Furet's book, ''Le Passé d'une illusion'' (''The Passing of an Illusion''), in which Furet had expressed his disagreement with Nolte's theories about Communism and fascism, leading Nolte to write a letter of protest to Furet. Furet argued that both ideologies were twins that shared the same origins, while Nolte repeated his views of fascism as a response to, and as a twin to Communism. After Furet's death, the letters were subsequently published in a book in France in 1997 as ''Fascisme et Communisme: échange épistolaire avec l'historien allemand Ernst Nolte prolongeant la Historikerstreit'' (''Fascism and Communism: Epistolary Exchanges With The German Historian Ernst Nolte Extending The Historikerstreit''), which was translated into English as ''Fascism and Communism'' in 2001.
Nolte often contributes ''Feulliton'' (opinion pieces) to German newspapers such as ''Die Welt'' and the ''Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung''. Most recently, in a 2006 interview, Nolte in a partial return to the theories he first expressed in ''The Three Faces of Fascism'', has written that Islamic fundamentalism is the third variant, after Communism and National Socialism of the âresistance to transcendenceâ, and has expressed regret that he will not have enough time to fully study Islamic fascism[86].
On June 4, 2000, Nolte was awarded the Konrad Adenauer Prize for Literature. The award attracted widespread protests and controversy. The man who delivered Nolte his award, Dr. Horst Möller, of the ''Institut fĂŒr Zeitgeschichte'' (Institute for Contemporary History), praised Nolteâs scholarship while trying to steer clear of Nolteâs more controversial claims. In his acceptance speech, Nolte commented that "We should leave behind the view that the opposite of National Socialist goals is always good and right" and that because of what in his view, was excessive Jewish support for Communism, that the Nazis might had "rational reasons" for their anti-Semitism[87]. In 2003-2004, Nolte was a prominent defender of Martin Hohmann, whose views about the ''Shoah'' were very similar to Nolte's. Some of Nolteâs claims made in his 1993 book ''Streitpunkte'' (''Points of Contention'') such as his assertion that historical understanding of the Holocaust has been âdistortedâ by âbiasedâ Jewish historians were recently favorably cited by a web-site maintained by the government of Iran promoting Holocaust denial. Currently, Nolte is a professor emeritus of contemporary history at the Free University of Berlin.
★ ''Der Faschismus in seiner Epoche : die Action française der italienische Faschismus, der Nationalsozialismus'', MĂŒnchen : R. Piper, 1963, translated into English as ''The Three Faces of Fascism; Action Francaise, Italian Fascism, National Socialism'', London, Weidenfeld and Nicolson 1965.
★ ''Der Faschismus : von Mussolini zu Hitler. Texte, Bilder und Dokumente'', Munich: Desch, 1968.
★ ''Die Krise des liberalen Systems und die faschistischen Bewegungen'', Munich : R. Piper, 1968.
★ ''Sinn und Widersinn der Demokratisierung in der UniversitĂ€t'', Rombach Verlag: Freiburg, 1968.
★ ''Les Mouvements fascistes, l'Europe de 1919 a 1945'', Paris : Calmann-Levy, 1969.
★ ''Deutschland und der kalte Krieg'', Munich: R. Piper, 1974, ISBN 3492020925.
★ ''Theorien ĂŒber den Faschismus'', Köln : Kiepenheuer & Witsch, 1976, ISBN 346200607X.
★ "The Problem of Fascism In Recent Scholarship" pages 26-42 from ''Reappraisals of Fascism'' edited by Henry A. Turner, New York: Franklin Watts, 1976, ISBN 0-531-05372-5.
★ ''Die faschistischen Bewegungen : die Krise des liberalen Systems und die Entwicklung der Faschismen'', MĂŒnchen : Deutscher Taschenbuch-Verlag, 1977, ISBN 3423040041.
★ ''Marxismus, Faschismus, kalter Krieg: Vortrage u. Aufsatze 1964-1976'', Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt, 1977, translated into English as ''Marxism, Fascism, Cold War'', Assen, The Netherlands : Van Gorcum, 1982, ISBN 9023218779.
★ ''Marxismus und industrielle Revolution'', Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta, 1983, ISBN 3608911286.
★ "Between Myth and Revisionism? The Third Reich in the Perspective of the 1980s" pages 17-38 from ''Aspects of the Third Reich'' edited by H.W. Koch, St. Martin's Press, New York, 1985, ISBN 0333352726.
★ ''Der europĂ€ische BĂŒrgerkrieg 1917â1945: Nationalsozialismus und Bolschewismus'' Frankfurt : ProylĂ€en , 1987, ISBN 978-3776690033.
★ ''Das Vergehen der Vergangenheit : Antwort an meine Kritiker im sogenannten Historikerstreit'', Berlin : Ullstein, 1987, ISBN 978-3550072178.
★ ''Nietzsche und der Nietzscheanismus'', Frankfurt: PropylĂ€en, 1990, ISBN 978-3776621532.
★ ''LehrstĂŒck oder Tragödie?: BeitrĂ€ge zur Interpretation der Geschichte des 20. Jahrhunderts'', Böhlau 1991, ISBN 3412042919.
★ ''Geschichtsdenken im 20. Jahrhundert: Von Max Weber bis Hans Jonas'', Frankfurt: PropylĂ€en, 1991 , ISBN 3-549-05379-7.
★ ''Martin Heidegger: Politik und Geschichte im Leben und Denken'', Frankfurt: PropylĂ€en, 1992, ISBN 978-3549072417.
★ "The Past That Will Not Pass" pages 18-23 from ''Forever In The Shadow of Hitler?'' edited by Ernst Piper, Humanities Press, Atlantic Highlands, New Jersey, 1993, ISBN 0391037846.
★ ''Streitpunkte: Heutige und kunftige Kontroversen um den Nationalsozialismus'', Frankfurt: PropylĂ€en, 1993, ISBN 978-3549052341.
★ ''Die Deutschen und ihre Vergangenheiten: Erinnerung und Vergessen von der Reichsgrundung Bismarcks bis heute'', Frankfurt : PropylĂ€en, 1995, ISBN 3-7766-9004-6.
★ ''Historische Existenz: Zwischen Anfang und Ende der Geschichte?'', Munich: Piper 1998, ISBN 3492040705.
★ co-written with François Furet ''Fascisme et Communisme: Ă©change Ă©pistolaire avec l'historien allemand Ernst Nolte prolongeant la Historikerstreit'', Paris: Plon, 1998, translated into English by Katherine Golsan as ''Fascism and Communism'' with a preface by Tzvetan Todorov, Lincoln, Nebraska: University of Nebraska Press, 2001, ISBN 0803219954.
★ ''Der kausale Nexus. Ăber Revisionen und Revisionismen in der Geschichtswissenschaft; Studien, Artikel und VortrĂ€ge 1990â2000'', Herbig Verlag: Munich, 2002, ISBN 3-7766-2279-2.
★ ''Les Fondements historiques du national-socialisme'', Paris: Editions du Rocher, 2002.
★ ''L'ereditĂ del nazionalsocialismo'', Rome: Di Renzo Editore, 2003.
★ co-written with Siegfried Gerlich ''Einblick in ein Gesamtwerk'', Edition Antaios: Dresden 2005, ISBN 3-9350-6361-X.
★ ''Die Weimarer Republik. Demokratie zwischen Lenin und Hitler'', Herbig Verlag: Munich, 2006, ISBN 3-7766-2491-4.
1. Maier, Charles "Immoral Equivalence" pages 36-41 from the ''New Republic'', December 1, 1986 page 38.
2. Strute, Karl and Doelken, Theodor (editors) ''Who's Who In Germany 1982-1983'' Volume 2 N-Z, Verlag AG: Zurich, 1983 page 1194.
3. Strute, Karl and Doelken, Theodor (editors) ''Who's Who In Germany 1982-1983'' Volume 2 N-Z, Verlag AG: Zurich, 1983 page 1194.
4. Maier, Charles ''The Unmasterable Past'', Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1988 pages 26 & 42; Maier, Charles "Immoral Equivalence" from the ''New Republic'', December 1, 1986 page 38.
5. http://www.stanford.edu/dept/relstud/faculty/sheehan/pdf/NormalNa.pdf
6. Strute, Karl and Doelken, Theodor (editors) ''Who's Who In Germany 1982-1983'' Volume 2 N-Z, Verlag AG: Zurich, 1983 page 1194.
7. Griffin, Roger ''International Fascism'' Arnold: London, 1998 page 47
8. Griffin, Roger ''International Fascism'' Arnold: London, 1998 page 47
9. Griffin, Roger ''International Fascism'' Arnold: London, 1998 page 47
10. Griffin, Roger ''International Fascism'' Arnold: London, 1998 page 48
11. Maier, Charles ''The Unmasterable Past'' Harvard University Press: Cambridge, Massachusettes, 1988 pages 85-86.
12. Griffin, Roger ''International Fascism'' Arnold: London, 1998 pages 47-48
13. Kershaw, Ian The ''Nazi Dictatorship'', London: Arnold 1989 page 27.
14. Kershaw, Ian The ''Nazi Dictatorship'', London: Arnold 1989 page 27; Maier, Charles ''The Unmasterable Past'' Harvard University Press: Cambridge, Massachusettes, 1988 pages 86-87.
15. Kershaw, Ian The ''Nazi Dictatorship'', London: Arnold 1989 page 27; Maier, Charles ''The Unmasterable Past'' Harvard University Press: Cambridge, Massachusettes, 1988 pages 86-87.
16. Epstein, Klaus "A New Study of Fascism" pages 2-25 from ''Reappraisals of Fascism'' edited by Henry A. Turner, New York: Franklin Watts, 1976 pages 19-22.
17. Marrus, Michael ''The Holocaust In History'', Toronto : Lester & Orpen Dennys : Hanover : University Press of New England, 1987 pages 38-39.
18. Bauer, Yehuda ''Rethinking the Holocaust'' New Haven: Yale University Press, 2001 page 104
19. Griffin, Roger ''International Fascism'' Arnold: London, 1998 page 48
20. Griffin, Roger ''International Fascism'' Arnold: London, 1998 page 48.
21. Kershaw, Ian The ''Nazi Dictatorship'', London: Arnold 1989 page 27.
22. Maier, Charles ''The Unmasterable Past'' Harvard University Press: Cambridge, Massachusettes, 1988 pages 84-85, 87 & 100-101.
23. Maier, Charles ''The Unmasterable Past'', Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1988 page 87.
24. Lukacs, John ''The Hitler of History'' New York: Vintage Books, 1997, 1998 page 118.
25. Maier, Charles ''The Unmasterable Past'', Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1988 pages 27-28
26. Lukacs, John ''The Hitler of History'' New York: Vintage Books, 1997, 1998 page 35; Maier, Charles "Immoral Equivalence"from the ''New Republic'', December 1, 1986 page 38.
27. Evans, Richard J. ''In Hitler's Shadow'' New York: Pantheon Books, 1989 page 27.
28. Baldwin, Peter ''Reworking The Past'', Boston : Beacon Press, 1990 page 7.
29. Baldwin, Peter ''Reworking The Past'', Boston : Beacon Press, 1990 pages 7-8.
30. Baldwin, Peter ''Reworking The Past'', Boston : Beacon Press, 1990 page 8.
31. Maier, Charles ''The Unmasterable Past'', Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1988 page 28.
32. Baldwin, Peter ''Reworking The Past'', Boston : Beacon Press, 1990 page 8.
33. Baldwin, Peter ''Reworking The Past'', Boston : Beacon Press, 1990 page 9.
34. Baldwin, Peter ''Reworking The Past'', Boston : Beacon Press, 1990 pages 8-9.
35. Maier, Charles ''The Unmasterable Past'', Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1988 page 29.
36. Maier, Charles ''The Unmasterable Past'', Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1988 page 30.
37. Nolte, Ernst âBetween Myth and Revisionismâ pages 17-38 from ''Aspects of the Third Reich'', edited by H.W. Koch, New York: St. Martinâs Press, 1985 pages 35-36; Nolte, Ernst "The Past That Will Not Pass" pages 18-23 from ''Forever In The Shadow of Hitler?'' edited by Ernst Piper, Humanities Press, Atlantic Highlands, New Jersey, 1993 page 22.
38. Nolte, Ernst "The Past That Will Not Pass" pages 18-23 from ''Forever In The Shadow of Hitler?'' edited by Ernst Piper, Humanities Press, Atlantic Highlands, New Jersey, 1993 page 21; Evans, Richard J. ''In Hitler's Shadow'' New York: Pantheon Books, 1989 disputes Nolte's evidence for the "rat cage" torture being a common Bolshevik practice pages 37-38.
39. Baldwin, Peter ''Reworking The Past'', Boston : Beacon Press, 1990 page 5.
40. Baldwin, Peter ''Reworking The Past'', Boston : Beacon Press, 1990 page 5.
41. Nolte, Ernst âBetween Myth and Revisionismâ pages 17-38 from ''Aspects of the Third Reich'', edited by H.W. Koch, New York: St. Martinâs Press, 1985 pages 27-28.
42. Nolte, Ernst âBetween Myth and Revisionismâ pages 17-38 from ''Aspects of the Third Reich'', edited by H.W. Koch, New York: St. Martinâs Press, 1985 page 28.
43. Evans, Richard J. ''In Hitler's Shadow'' New York: Pantheon Books, 1989 page 28.
44. Maier, Charles The Unmasterable Past Harvard University Press: Cambridge, Massachusettes, 1988 pages 86-87
45. Baldwin, Peter ''Reworking The Past'', Boston : Beacon Press, 1990 pages 9-10.
46. Nolte, Ernst "Standing Things On Their Heads: Against Negative Nationalism In Interpreting History" pages 149-154 from ''Forever In The Shadow of Hitler?'' edited by Ernst Piper, Humanities Press, Atlantic Highlands, New Jersey, 1993 page 152; both Kershaw, Ian ''The Nazi Dictatorship'', London: Arnold, 1989 page 176 & Evans, Richard J. ''In Hitler's Shadow'' New York: Pantheon Books, 1989 page 37 claim that Nolte has taken Tucholsky's sardonic remark about chemical warfare in the future out of context.
47. Kershaw, Ian ''The Nazi Dictatorship'', London: Arnold, 1989 page 173.
48. http://www.codoh.com/thoughtcrimes/8706nolt.html.
49. http://www.codoh.com/thoughtcrimes/8706nolt.html.
50. Habermas, JĂŒrgen âA Kind of Settlement of Damages On Apologetic Tendencies In German History Writingâ pages 34-44 from ''Forever In the Shadow of Hitler?'' edited by Ernst Piper, Humanities Press, Atlantic Highlands, 1993 page 43.
51. Augstein, Rudolf "The New Auschwitz Lie" pages 131-134 from ''Forever In The Shadow of Hitler?'' edited by Ernst Piper, Humanities Press, Atlantic Highlands, New Jersey, 1993 pages 133-134.
52. JĂ€ckel, Eberhard "The Impoverished Practice of Insinuation: The Singular Aspect of National-Socialist Crimes Cannot Be Denied" pages 74-78 from ''Forever In The Shadow of Hitler?'' edited by Ernst Piper, Humanities Press, Atlantic Highlands, 1993 pages 77-78.
53. Mommsen, Hans "Search for the 'Lost History'?" pages 101-113 from ''Forever In The Shadow of Hitler?'' edited by Ernst Piper, Humanities Press, Atlantic Highlands, 1993 page 108.
54. Mommsen, Wolfgang J. "Neither Denial nor Forgetfulness Will Free Us" pages 202-215 from ''Forever In The Shadow of Hitler?'' edited by Ernst Piper, Humanities Press, Atlantic Highlands, 1993 pages 208-209.
55. Broszat, Martin "Where the Roads Part" pages 125-129 from ''Forever In The Shadow of Hitler?'' edited by Ernst Piper, Humanities Press, Atlantic Highlands, 1993 page 126.
56. Hildebrand, Klaus "The Age of Tyrants: History and Politics" pages 50-55 from ''Forever In The Shadow of Hitler?'' edited by Ernst Piper, Humanities Press, Atlantic Highlands, New Jersey, 1993 pages 54-55.
57. Fest, Joachim "Encumbered Remembrance: The Controversy about the Incomparability of National-Socialist Mass Crimes" pages 63-71 from ''Forever In The Shadow of Hitler?'' edited by Ernst Piper, Humanities Press, Atlantic Highlands, New Jersey, 1993 pages 64-65.
58. Nolte, Ernst "Letter to the Editor of ''Die Zeit'' August 1, 1986" pages 56-57 from ''Forever In The Shadow of Hitler?'' edited by Ernst Piper, Humanities Press, Atlantic Highlands, New Jersey, 1993 page 57.
59. Kershaw, Ian ''The Nazi Dictatorship'', London: Arnold, 1989 page 171.
60. Evans, Richard J. ''In Hitler's Shadow'' New York: Pantheon Books, 1989 page 177
61. Evans, Richard J. ''In Hitler's Shadow'' New York: Pantheon Books, 1989 pages 116-117
62. Thomas, Gina (editor) ''The Unresolved Past'', New York: St. Martin's Press, 1990 pages vii-viii.
63. Evans, Richard J. ''In Hitler's Shadow'' New York: Pantheon Books, 1989 page 38.
64. Evans, Richard J. ''In Hitler's Shadow'' New York: Pantheon Books, 1989 page 38.
65. Lukacs, John ''The Hitler of History'' New York: Vintage Books, 1997, 1998 pages 180-181.
66. Vidal-Naquet, Pierre ''Assassins of Memory'', New York: Columbia University Press, 1992 page 126.
67. Kershaw, Ian ''The Nazi Dictatorship'', London: Arnold, 1989 page 176.
68. Evans, Richard J. ''In Hitler's Shadow'' New York: Pantheon Books, 1989 pages 38-39.
69. Evans, Richard J. ''In Hitler's Shadow'' New York: Pantheon Books, 1989 page 31
70. Evans, Richard J. ''In Hitler's Shadow'' New York: Pantheon Books, 1989 pages 33-34, 42-43, 56, 82-83, 184-185; Kershaw, Ian ''The Nazi Dictatorship'', London: Arnold, 1989 pages 175-177.
71. Evans, Richard J. ''In Hitler's Shadow'' New York: Pantheon Books, 1989 pages 85-87
72. Evans, Richard J. ''In Hitler's Shadow'' New York: Pantheon Books, 1989 pages 152-153
73. Nolte, Ernst âBetween Myth and Revisionismâ pages 17-38 from ''Aspects of the Third Reich'', edited by H.W. Koch, New York: St. Martinâs Press, 1985 page 21.
74. Nolte, Ernst âBetween Myth and Revisionismâ pages 17-38 from ''Aspects of the Third Reich'', edited by H.W. Koch, New York: St. Martinâs Press, 1985 page 21.
75. Evans, Richard J. ''In Hitler's Shadow'' New York: Pantheon Books, 1989 pages 32-33.
76. Lukacs, John ''The Hitler of History'' New York: Vintage Books, 1997, 1998 page 229; Evans, Richard J. ''In Hitler's Shadow'' New York: Pantheon Books, 1989 pages 166-167.
77. Lipstadt, Deborah ''Denying the Holocaust'' New York: Free Press, 1993 pages 214-215.
78. http://www.jcpa.org/phas/phas-11.htm
79. Wistrich, Robert S. "Holocaust Denial" pages 293-301 from ''The Holocaust Encyclopedia'' edited by Walter Laqueur, New Haven: Yale University Press, 2001 page 299; Lukacs, John ''The Hitler of History'' New York: Vintage Books, 1997, 1998 page 233.
80. http://www.stanford.edu/dept/relstud/faculty/sheehan/pdf/NormalNa.pdf
81. Nolte, Ernst ''Martin Heidegger'', Frankfurt: PropylÀen, 1992 page 152.
82. http://www.nybooks.com/articles/2618
83. http://www.nybooks.com/articles/2618
84. http://www.nybooks.com/articles/2618
85. "Ein historisches Recht Hitlers"? Der Faschismus-Interpret Ernst Nolte ĂŒber den Nationalsozialismus, Auschwitz und die Neue Rechte' pages 83-103 from ''Der Spiegel'' , Volume 40, 1994.
86. http://www.welt.de/print-welt/article225060/Religion_vom_absoluten_Boesen.html.
87. http://www.osborne-conant.org/nolte.htm
★ Baldwin, Peter ''Reworking The Past : Hitler, the Holocaust, and the Historians' Debate'', Boston : Beacon Press, 1990 ISBN 0-8070-4302-8.
★ Bauer, Yehuda ''Rethinking the Holocaust'' New Haven: Yale University Press, 2001 ISBN 0-300-082256-8.
★ Craig, Gordon "The War of the German Historians" pages 16-19 from ''New York Review of Books'', February 15, 1987.
★ Epstein, Klaus "A New Study of Fascism" pages 2-25 from ''Reappraisals of Fascism'' edited by Henry Ashby Turner, New York: Franklin Watts, 1976, ISBN 0-531-05372-5.
★ Evans, Richard ''In Hitler's Shadow: West German Historians and the Attempt to Escape the Nazi Past'', New York, NY: Pantheon, 1989 ISBN 0-679-72348-X.
★ FriedlĂ€nder, Saul ''Memory, History, And The Extermination Of The Jews Of Europe'', Bloomington : Indiana University Press, 1993 ISBN 0-253-32483-1
★ Hirschfeld, Gerhard ''Erasing the Past?'' pages 8â10 from ''History Today'' Volume 37, Issue 8, August 1987.
★ Kershaw, Sir Ian ''The Nazi Dictatorship: Problems and Perspectives of Interpretations'', London: Arnold, 1989 ISBN 0-340-49008-X.
★ Griffin, Roger (editor) ''International Fascism Theories, Causes, and the New Consensus'', London: Arnold, 1998, ISBN 0 340 70613 9.
★ Lipstadt, Deborah ''Denying the Holocaust: The Growing Assault on Truth and Memory'', New York : Free Press ; Toronto : Maxwell Macmillan Canada ; New York ; Oxford : Maxwell Macmillan International, 1993, ISBN 0-02-919235-8.
★ Lukacs, John ''The Hitler of History'', New York : A. A. Knopf, 1997 ISBN 0-679-44649-4.
★ Maier, Charles ''The Unmasterable Past: History, Holocaust and German National Identity'', Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1988 ISBN ISBN 0-674-92975-6.
★ Maier, Charles "Immoral Equivalence" pages 36-41 from ''The New Republic'', Volume 195, Number 22, Issue 3, 750, December 1, 1986.
★ Marrus, Michael ''The Holocaust In History'', Toronto : Lester & Orpen Dennys : Hanover : University Press of New England, 1987 ISBN 0-88619-155-6.
★ Muller, Jerry "German Historians At War" pages 33-42 from ''Commentary'' Volume 87, Issue #5, May 1989.
★ Piper, Ernst (editor) ''Forever In The Shadow of Hitler? : Original Documents Of The Historikerstreit, The Controversy Concerning The Singularity Of The Holocaust'', translated by James Knowlton and Truett Cates, Atlantic Highlands, N.J. : Humanities Press, 1993 ISBN 0-391-03784-6.
★ Strute, Karl and Doelken, Theodor (editors) ''Who's Who In Germany 1982-1983'' Volume 2 N-Z, Verlag AG: Zurich, 1983, ISBN 0510-4009.
★ Thomas, Gina (editor) ''The Unresolved Past A Debate In German History'', New York: St. Martin's Press, 1990, ISBN 0-312-057996-2.
★ Vidal-Naquet, Pierre ''Assassins of Memory Essays on the Denial of the Holocaust'', New York: Columbia University Press, 1992, ISBN 0-231-07457-1.
★ Wistrich, Robert S. "Holocaust Denial" pages 293-301 from ''The Holocaust Encyclopedia'' edited by Walter Laqueur, New Haven: Yale University Press, 2001 ISBN 0-300-08432-3.
★ Wyden, Peter ''The Hitler Virus: The Insidious Legacy of Adolf Hitler'', Arcade Publishing, 2002, ISBN 1-55970-616-3.
★ Ernst Nolte - personal website (in German)
★ Shades of Revisionism: Holocaust Denial and the Conservative Call to Reinterpret German History
★ Ernst Nolte and Holocaust Revisionism
★ Throwing Off Germany's Imposed History The Third Reich's Place in History A Conversation with Professor Ernst Nolte Readers of the Nolte article are strongly encouraged to read the IHR entry for information on his publishers, who are themselves controversial as Holocaust deniers and Nazi apologists.
★ Hitler Apologist Wins German Honor, and a Storm Breaks Out
★ The Logic of Horror by Götz Aly.
★ A Normal Nazi Review of Martin Heidegger by Ernst Nolte
★ Heidegger and Nazism: An Exchange
★ Interview with Ernst Nolte in French
★ Ernst Nolte and the Memory of the Shoah
| Contents |
| Early life |
| ''Fascism In Its Epoch'' |
| Methodology |
| The ''Historikerstreit'' |
| Later career |
| Work |
| Endnotes |
| References |
| External links |
Early life
Born in Witten, Germany to a Roman Catholic family, Nolte's father, was a school rector[2]. Nolte's parents were Heinrich and Anna (nee Bruns) Nolte[2]. In 1941, Nolte was excused from military service because of a deformed hand, and he studied Philosophy, Philology and Greek at the Universities of MĂŒnster, Berlin, and Freiburg. At Freiburg, Nolte was a student of Martin Heidegger, who was a major influence on Nolte[4]. From 1944 onwards, Nolte has been a close friend of the Heidegger family, and when in 1945, Heidegger feared arrest by the French, Nolte provided Heidegger with food and laundry when Heidegger attempted to escape[5]. Another professor who influenced Nolte was Eugen Fink. After 1945 when Nolte received his BA in philosophy at Freiburg, Nolte worked as an ''Gymnasium'' (high school) teacher. In 1952, he received a PhD in philosophy at Freiburg for his thesis ''Selbstentfremdung und Dialektik im deutschen Idealismus und bei Marx'' (''Self Alienation and Dialectic in German idealism and Marx''). Subsequently, Nolte began studies in ''Zeitgeschichte'' (contemporary history), and published his ''Habilitationsschrift'' awarded at the University of Cologne, ''Der Faschismus in seiner Epoche'' as a book in 1963. Between 1965-1973, Nolte worked as a professor at the University of Marburg, and from 1973-1991 at the Free University of Berlin. Nolte's wife is Annedore Mortier[2] and their son, Georg Nolte is a professor of international law at the University of Munich.
''Fascism In Its Epoch''
Nolte first rose to fame with his 1963 book ''Der Faschismus in seiner Epoche'' (''Fascism In Its Epoch''; translated into English in 1965 as ''The Three Faces Of Fascism''), in which Nolte argued that fascism arose as a form of resistance to and a reaction against modernity. Nolte's basic hypothesis and methodology were deeply rooted in the German "philosophy of history" tradition, a form of Intellectual history which seeks to discover the "metapolitical dimension" of history[7]. The "metapolitical dimension" is considered to the history of those grand ideas, which function as a profound spiritual power, infusing every aspect of the multi-layered levels of society with their force[7]. In Nolte's opinion, only those with training in philosophy can discover the "metapolitical dimension", and those who use normal historical methods miss this dimension of time[7]. Using the methods of phenomenology, Nolte subjected German Nazism, Italian Fascism and the French Action Française movements to a comparative analysis. Nolteâs conclusion was that fascism was the great anti-movement; namely it was anti-liberal, anti-communist, anti-capitalist, and anti-bourgeois. In Nolteâs view, fascism was the rejection of everything the modern world had to offer and was an essentially negative phenomenon[10]. In an Hegelian dialectic, Nolte argued that the ''Action Française'' was the thesis, Italian Fascism was the antithesis, and German National Socialism the synthesis of the two earlier fascist movements[11]. Nolte argued that fascism functioned at three levels; in the world of politics as a form of opposition to Marxism, at the sociological level as opposition to the values of bourgeois society, and finally in the âmetapoliticalâ world, where fascism functioned as âresistance to transcendenceâ ("Transcendence" in German can be translated as the "spirit of modernity")[12]. Nolte defined "transcendence" as a "metapolitical" force comprising two types of change[13]. The first type being "practical transcendence" as manifested in material progress, technological change, political equality, social advancement, and comprises the process, in which humanity liberates itself from traditional, hierarchical societies in favor of societies where all men and all women are equal[14]. The second type is "theoretical transcendence", which is the attainment of the mind to go further than what exists in the world today towards what can exist in the future, and comprises the process in which humanity removes all of the traditional fetters imposed on the human mind by poverty, backwardness, ignorance, and class[14]. Drawing upon the work of Max Weber, Friedrich Nietzsche, and Karl Marx, Nolte argued that as both types of "transcendence" advance, this progress generates fear as the older world is swept aside by a new world, and that it was these fears that led to fascism[16]. In regards to the Holocaust, Nolte contended that because Adolf Hitler identified Jews with modernity, the basic thrust of Nazi policies towards Jews had always aimed at genocide[17]. In Nolte's famous phrase, "Auschwitz was contained in the principles of Nazi racist theory like the seed in the fruit"[18]. ''The Three Faces of Fascism'' was much praised at the time and since as a seminal contribution to the creation of a theory of generic fascism based on an history of ideas, as opposed to the previous class-based analysisâs (especially the "Rage of the Lower Middle Class" thesis) that had characterized both Marxist and liberal interpretations of fascism [10]. Roger Griffin has written that although written in an excessively arcane and obscure language, Nolte's theory of fascism as a âform of resistance to transcendenceâ marked an important step in the understanding of fascism, and helped to spur scholars into new avenues of research on fascism[20].
Other historians were more hostile in their assessement of ''The Three Faces of Fascism''. Criticism from the left centered on Nolte's focus on ideas as opposed to social and economic conditions as a motivating force for fascism, and that Nolte depended too much on the fascist writings to make support his thesis[13]. From the right, historians such as Karl Dietrich Bracher criticized the entire notion of generic fascism as intellectually invalid and argued that it was individual choice on the part of Germans as opposed to Nolte's philosophical view of the "metapolitical" that produced National Socialism[22]. Bracher's ''magnum opus'', his 1969 book ''Die deutsche Diktatur'' (''The German Dictatorship'') was partly written to rebut Nolte's theory of generic fascism, and instead presented a picture of the National Socialist dictatorship as a totalitarian regime created and sustained by human actions[23]. Together with the work of Eugen Weber, ''The Three Faces of Fascism'' was one of the first books that devoted an extensive study of the ultra-nationalist and anti-Semitic ''Action Française'' movement of France, but many have questioned Nolteâs claim that the ''Action Française'' was a fascist movement, or in the case of John Lukacs, whatever such a thing as generic fascism ever existed[24].
As a professor at the University of Marburg in the late 1960s, Nolte was the target of student protestors, an experience that left him with a strong distaste for the West German left[25]. For a time in the 1960s, all of Nolte's classes were boycotted by radical students, who demanded Nolte's dismissal, an experience that some such as John Lukacs and Charles Maier have credited with Nolte's radical change of views about the National Socialist period[26]. Later in the 1970s, Nolte was to reject the theory of generic fascism that he had championed in ''The Three Faces of Fascism'' and instead embraced totalitarian theory as a way of explaining both Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union. In Nolte's opinion, Nazi Germany was a "mirror image" of the Soviet Union and with the exception of the âtechnical detailâ of mass gassing everything the Nazis in Germany did, the Communists in Russia did first[27].
Methodology
All of Nolteâs historical work has been heavily influenced by German traditions of philosophy[28]. In particular, Nolte seeks to find the total essences of the âmetapolitical phenomenonâ of history, to discover the grand ideas which motivated all of history, and as such, Nolteâs work has been oriented towards the general as opposed to the specific attributes of a particular period of time[29]. In his 1974 book, ''Deutschland und der kalte Krieg'' (''Germany and the Cold War''), Nolte examined the partition of Germany after 1945 less by looking at the specific history of the Cold War and Germany, and more by examining other divided states throughout history, and treated the German partition as the supreme culmination of the "metapolitical" idea of partition caused by rival ideologies[30]. In Nolte's view, the division of Germany made that nation the world's central battlefield between Soviet Communism and American democracy, both of which were rival streams of the "transcendence" that had vanished the Third Reich, the ultimate enemy of "transcendence"[31]. As such, Nolte treats the history of ideas with little interest to the specific historical context of the ideas, and more by seeking what Carl Schmitt labelled the abstract "final" or "ulimate" end of an idea, which for Nolte are the most extreme conclusions which can be drawn from an idea, and represents the ''ultima terminus'' of the "metapolitical"[30]. For Nolte, ideas have a force of their own, and once a new idea is introduced into the world, except for the total destruction of society, it can not longer be ignored any more than the invention of nuclear weapons and the discovery of how to make fire can be rolled back[33]. In Nolte's view, Communism by introducing the idea of a total destruction of a particular group was the most important idea of the 20th century[34]. Together with such historians as François Furet and Renzo De Felice, both of whom Nolte sometimes corresponded with, Nolte has sought to develop a wide-ranging paradigm capable of explaining (or Nolteâs words âunderstandingâ) the 20th century.
The ''Historikerstreit''
Nolte is best known for his role in launching the ''Historikerstreit'' (Historianâs Dispute) of 1986-1987. On June 6, 1986 Nolte published an article entitled ''Vergangenheit, die nicht vergehen will: Eine Rede, die geschrieben, aber nicht mehr gehalten werden konnte'' ("''The Past That Will Not Go Away: A Speech That Could Be Written but Not Delivered''") in the ''Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung''. His article was a distillation of ideas that Nolte had first introduced in lectures that he delivered in 1976 and in 1980. Earlier in 1986, Nolte had planned to deliver a speech before the Frankfurt Römerberg Conversations, but the organizers of the event withdrew their invitation[35]. In response, the editor of the ''Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung'', Joachim Fest allowed Nolte to have his speech printed as an article in his newspaper[36]. In his article, Nolte advanced the view that the crimes of the Nazis were only a defensive reaction against the crimes of the Soviets. In Nolteâs view, National Socialism had only arisen in response to the âclass genocideâ and âAsiatic barbarismâ of the Bolsheviks"[37]. Nolte cited the example of the early Nazi Max Erwin von Scheubner-Richter, who during World War I had been the German consul in Erzerum, Turkey and was appalled by the genocide of the Armenians; in Nolte's view, the fact that Scheuber-Richter later on became a Nazi shows that something must have changed his values, and in Nolte's opinion, it was the Russian Revolution and such alleged Bolshevik practices as the "rat cage" torture (said by Russian Ă©migrĂ© authors to be a favorite torture by Chinese serving in the Cheka during the Russian Civil War) that led to the change [38]. Along the same lines, Nolte argued that the Holocaust, or "racial genocide" as Nolte prefers to call it, was an understandable if excessive response on the part of Adolf Hitler to the Soviet threat. In Nolte's view, Soviet mass murder were ''Vorbild'' (the example that inspired the Nazis) and ''Schreckbild'' (the horrific model)[39]. Nolte labeled the Holocaust an "''ĂŒberschieĂende Reaktion''" (overshooting reaction) to Bolshevik crimes, and to alleged Jewish actions in support of Germany's enemies[39].
As proof of this argument of the Holocaust as a defensive reaction, Nolte presented a letter written by Chaim Weizmann, the President of the World Zionist Organization on September 3, 1939 to the British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain pledging full and unconditional support to the British war effort. Nolte has called Weizmann's letter to Chamberlain a "Jewish declaration of warâ against Germany"[41] (see also "Judea Declares War on Germany"). The second piece of evidence Nolte presented was a book written in 1940 by the American author Theodore N. Kaufman called ''Germany Must Perish!'' that appealed to have all German men sterilized. Nolte argued that the Nazis felt forced to stage the Holocaust because Hitler concluded that entire Jewish population of the world had declared war on Germany. From Nolteâs point of view, the Holocaust was act of âAsiatic barbarismâ forced on the Germans out of the fear over what Joseph Stalin, who Nolte charged had significant Jewish support, might do to them. Nolte has argued that after the Japanese attack on the United States in 1941, the U.S. authorities interned the entire Japanese-American population, so by the same logic, the Germans were within their rights to "intern" the Jewish population of Europe in concentration camps"[42].
Subsequently, Nolte expanded upon these views in his 1987 book ''Der europĂ€ische BĂŒrgerkrieg, 1917-1945'' (''The European Civil War, 1917-1945'') in which he claimed that the entire 20th century was an age of genocide, totalitarianism, and tyranny, and that the Holocaust had been merely one chapter in the age of violence, terror and population displacement. Nolte claimed that this age had started with the genocide of the Armenians during World War I, and also included the Stalinist terror in the Soviet Union, the explusion of ethnic Germans from Eastern Europe, Maoist terror in China as manifested in such events as the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution, compulsory population exchanges between Greece and Turkey in 1922-1923, and the Khmer Rouge genocide in Cambodia. In Nolte's view, the great deciding event of the 20th century had been the Russian Revolution of 1917, which in Nolte's view, plunged all of Europe into a long-simmering civil war that lasted until 1945. In Nolte's opinion, fascism, which was Communism's twin, arose as a desperate response by the threatened middle classes of Europe to what Nolte has often called the âBolshevik perilâ[43]. In a marked change from the views expressed in ''The Three Faces of Fascism'', in which Communism was a stream of âtranscendenceâ, Nolte now classified communism together with fascism as both rival streams of the âresistance to transcendenceâ[44]. The âmetapolitical phenomenonâ of Communism led to in an Hegelian dialectic to the âmetapolitical phenomenonâ of fascism, which was both a copy of and the most ardent opponent of Marxism[45]. As an example of his thesis, Nolte cited an article written in 1927 by Kurt Tucholsky calling for middle-class Germans to be gassed, which in Nolte's view, was much more deplorable then the celebratory comments made by some right-wing newspapers about the assassination of the German Foreign Minister Walter Rathenau in 1922[46].
These views ignited a firestorm of controversy. Most historians in West Germany and virtually all historians outside Germany condemned Nolteâs interpretation as factually incorrect, and as coming dangerously close to justifying the Holocaust[47]. Many historians such as Steven T. Katz claimed that Nolteâs âAge of Genocideâ concept âtrivializedâ the Holocaust by reducing it down to one of just many genocides of the 20th century. Further adding to the controversy was an statement by Nolte in June 1987 that Adolf Hitler "created the state of Israel", and that "âŠthe Jews would eventually come to appreciate Hitler as the individual who contributed more than anyone else to the creation of the state of Israel".[48].As a result of that remark, Nolte was sacked from his position as chief editor of the German language edition of Theodore Herzl's letters by the ''Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft'' (German Research Community), the group that was responsible for the financing of the Herzl papers project.[48].
The philosopher JĂŒrgen Habermas in an article in the ''Die Zeit'' newspaper on July 11, 1986 entitled âA Kind of Settlement of Damagesâ strongly criticized Nolte together with Andreas Hillgruber and Michael StĂŒrmer for engaging in Habermas called âapologeticâ history writing in regards to the Nazi era, and for seeking to âclose Germanyâs opening to the Westâ that in Habermasâs view had existed since 1945.[50].. In particular, Habermas took Nolte to task for suggesting a moral equivalence between the Holocaust and the Khmer Rouge genocide. In Habermasâs opinion, since Cambodia was a backward, Third World agrarian state and Germany in a modern, First World industrial state, there was no comparison between the two genocides. In response, Fest, who was one of Nolteâs leading defenders, called Habermas a racist for suggesting that it was ânaturalâ for Cambodians to engage in genocide, and âunnaturalâ for Germans to engage in genocide.
Some of the historians who denounced Nolteâs views included Hans Mommsen, JĂŒrgen Kocka, Detlev Peukert, Martin Broszat, Hans-Ulrich Wehler, Michael Wolffsohn, Heinrich August Winkler, Wolfgang Mommsen, Karl Dietrich Bracher and Eberhard JĂ€ckel. In addition, Nolte faced criticism from the publisher Rudolf Augstein, who accused Nolte of creating the "New Auschwitz Lie"[51]. Much (through not all) of the criticism of Nolte came from historians who favored either the ''Sonderweg'' (''Special Way'') and/or intentionlist/functionalist interpretations of German history. From the advocates of the ''Sonderweg'' approach came the criticism that Nolteâs views had totally externalized the origins of the National Socialist dictatorship to the post-1917 period, whereas in their view, the roots of the Nazi dictatorhsip can be traced back to the 19th century Second Reich. In particular, it was argued that within the virulently anti-Semitic Völkisch movement, which first arose in the latter half of the 19th century, the ideological seeds of genocide were already planted. From both functionalist and intentionist historians came the similar criticism that the motives and momentum for the âFinal Solution to the Jewish Questionâ came primarily from within Germany, not as the result of external events. Intentionlists argued that Hitler did not need the Russian Revolution to provide him with a genocidal mindset, while functionalists argued it was the unstable power structure and bureaucratic rivalries of the Third Reich, which led to genocide of the Jews. Eberhard JĂ€ckel argued that Nolte's theory was ahistorical under the grounds that Hitler held the Soviet Union in contempt, and could not have felt threatened as Nolte claimed[52]. Hans Mommsen accused Nolte of attempting to "relativize" Nazi crimes[53] while his twin brother Wolfgang charged that Nolte was attempting to egregiously white-wash the German past[54]. Martin Broszat labelled Nolte an obnoxious crank[55]. Hans-Ulrich Wehler was so enraged by Nolte's views that he wrote a book ''Entsorgung der deutschen Vergangenheit?: ein polemischer Essay zum "Historikerstreit'' (''Exoneration of the German Past?: A Polemical Essay about the 'Historikerstreit') in 1988, which as its title indicated comprised a lengthy polemicial essay attacking every aspect of Nolte's views. Criticism from abroad came from Ian Kershaw, Gordon A. Craig, Richard J. Evans, Saul FriedlĂ€nder, John Lukacs, Michael Marrus, and Timothy Mason.
Coming to Nolte's defence were the journalist Joachim Fest, and the historians Klaus Hildebrand, Rainer Zitelmann and Hagen Schulze. Hildebrand praised Nolte for daring to open up new questions for research[56]. Fest claimed that Nolte's argument that Nazi crimes were not singular was correct[57]. Nolte for his part, started to write a series of letters to various newspapers such as ''Die Zeit'' and ''Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung'' attacking his critics; for an example, in a letter to ''Die Zeit'' on August 1, 1986, Nolte complained that his critic JĂŒrgen Habermas of attempting to censor him for expressing his views[58]. One of Nolte's letters created another controversy in late 1987, when the Israeli historian Otto Dov Kulka complained that a letter he wrote to Nolte criticizing his views was edited by Nolte to make him appear sympathetic to Nolte's arguments, and then released to the press[59]. In 1987, Nolte wrote an entire book responding to his critics both German and foreign, ''Das Vergehen der Vergangenheit : Antwort an meine Kritiker im sogenannten Historikerstreit'' (''The Offense Of The Past: Answer At My Critics In The So-Called Historians' Dispute''). Perhaps the most extreme response to Nolte's thesis occurred on February 9, 1988 when was his car was burned by a group of extreme leftists[60].
The ''Historikerstreit'' attracted much media attention in West Germany, and as a result, both Nolte and his opponents became frequent guests on West German radio and television. The ''Historikerstreit'' was characterized by a highly vitriolic tone, with both Nolte and his supporters and their opponents often resorting to vicious and savage personal attacks on each other[61]. Abroad, the ''Historikerstreit'', to a somewhat lesser extend brought a degree of fame to Nolte. In 1987, concerns about some of the claims being made by both sides in the ''Historikerstreit'' led to a conference being called in London that was attended by some of the leading British, American, Israeli, and German specialists in both Soviet and German history. Among those who attended included Sir Ralf Dahrendorf, Sir Isaiah Berlin, Lord Weidenfeld, Harold James, Carol Gluck, Lord Annan, Fritz Stern, Gordon A. Craig, Robert Conquest, Samuel Ettinger, JĂŒrgen Kocka, Sir Nicholas Henderson, Eberhard JĂ€ckel, Hans Mommsen, Michael StĂŒrmer, Joachim Fest, Hagen Schulze, Christian Maier, Wolfgang Mommsen, Hugh Trevor-Roper, Saul FriedlĂ€nder, Felix Gilbert, Norman Stone, Julius Schoeps, and Charles Maier[62]. Nolte was invited to the conference, but declined, citing scheduling conflicts.
Nolteâs opponents have expressed intense disagreement with his evidence for a Jewish "war" on Germany. They argue that Weizmannâs letter to Chamberlain was written in his capacity as head of the World Zionist Organization, not on behalf of the entire Jewish people of the world [63] and that Nolteâs views are based on the spurious idea that all Jews comprised a distinct "nationality" who take their marching orders from Jewish organizations[63]. Furthermore, it has been contended that there is no evidence that Hitler ever heard of Weizmannâs letter to Chamberlain, and that it was natural for Weizmann, an British Jew to declare his support for his country against a fiercely anti-Semitic regime[65]. As for Kaufmanâs book, the Nazis were certainly aware of it; during the war, ''Germany Must Perish!'' was translated into German and widely promoted as an example of what Jews thought about Germans. But most historians contended that the radical views of one American Jew can in no way be taken as typical of what all European Jews were thinking, and to put the call for the forced sterilization of Germans that was never carried out as Allied policy in the same league as the Holocaust shows a profound moral insensitivity[66]. Moreover, it has been shown that there is no indication that the Kaufman's book ever played any role in the decision-making progress that led to the Holocaust[67]. Finally, it has been contended that Nolte's comparison of the Holocaust with the internment of the Japanese-Americans is false, because the Jews of Europe were sent to death camps, not concentration camps and that the U.S. government did not attempt to exterminate the Japanese-Americans in the internment camps[68].
Later career
Nolteâs critics have frequently charged him with having neo-Nazi and anti-Semitic sympathies. Nolte has always vehemently denied these charges, and has insisted that he is a neo-liberal in his politics. Nolte is by his own admission, an intense German nationalist and his stated goal is to restore the sense of pride in their history that he feels the Germans have been missing since 1945. Above all, Nolte is opposed to any sort of ''Sonderweg'' interpretation of German history. In Nolte's view, the roots of National Socialism are only to be understood as an "...reaction born out of the anxiety of the annihilating occurrence of the Russian Revolution"[69], and lacked any connection with pre-1917 German history. Nolteâs defenders have pointed to numerous statements on his part condemning Nazi Germany and the Holocaust. Nolteâs critics have acknowledged these statements, but go on to claim that Nolte makes arguments that can be construed as being sympathetic to the Nazis such as his defence of the Commissar Order as a legitimate military order, his argument that the ''Einsatzgruppen'' massacres of Soviet Jews were a reasonable "preventive security" response to partisan attacks, his statements citing Viktor Suvorov that Operation Barbarossa was an "preventive war" forced on Hitler by an alleged impeding Soviet attack, his claim that too much scholarship on the ''Shoah'' has been done by "biased" Jewish historians or his use of Nazi-era language such as Nolte's practice of referring to the Red Army soldiers in World War II as âAsiatic hordesâ[70]. Many British and American historians have been angered by Nolte's statements that there was no moral difference between British "area bombing" of German cities in World War II and American war crimes in the Vietnam War and Nazi war crimes[71]. Many have charged that Nolteâs argument was meant to create a moral equivalence between British âarea bombingâ, American war crimes in Vietnam such as the My Lai Massacre and the ''Shoah''.
In particular, controversy has centered around an argument that Nolte made in his 1985 essay âBetween Myth and Revisionismâ from the book ''Aspects of the Third Reich'', first published in German as ''"Die negative Lebendigkeit des Dritten Reiches"'' (''"The Negative Legend of the Third Reich"'') as an opinion piece in the ''Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung'' on July 24, 1980[72]. In his essay Nolte argued that if the PLO were to destroy Israel, then the subsequent history written in the new Palestinian state would portray the former Israeli state in the blackest of colors[73]. In Nolteâs opinion, a similar situation with history written only by the victors exists in regards to the history of Nazi Germany[73]. Many historians such as the British historian Richard J. Evans have claimed that by making this argument Nolte is attempting to claim that the only reason why Nazism is seen is evil is because Germany lost World War II, not because of the Holocaust[75]. Another line of criticism has centered around Nolte's frequent, and heavy use of the work of the British historian David Irving to support his arguments[76].
Nolte has always denied these allegations of Nazi sympathies. Likewise, Nolte has pointed out that he always refused frequent offers to speak at the gatherings of the Institute for Historical Review; Nolte's critics such as Deborah Lipstadt have charged that the nature of Nolte's arguments about the Holocaust such as his suggestion in ''Der europĂ€ische BĂŒrgerkrieg'' that the Wannsee Conference may not have occurred has led to these frequent invitations to speak at the I.H.R.[77]. Likewise, Nolte has often vehemently criticized the laws banning Holocaust denial in Germany as a violation of free speech, and has called for their repeal. Lipstadt has argued that in her view the nature of Nolte's work is a more insidious and dangerous form of Holocaust denial than the work of David Irving. In a 2003 interview, Lipstadt was quoted as saying "Historians such as the German Ernst Nolte are, in some ways, even more dangerous than the deniers. Nolte is an anti-Semite of the first order, who attempts to rehabilitate Hitler by saying that he was no worse than Stalin; but he is careful not to deny the Holocaust. Holocaust deniers make Nolte's life more comfortable. They have, with their radical argumentation, pulled the center a little more to their side. Consequently, a less radical extremist, such as Nolte, finds himself closer to the middle ground, which makes him more dangerous"[78]. Through Nolte has never denied the Holocaust, he has often praised the work of David Irving, David Hoggan, Fred Leuchter, Arthur Butz, Paul Rassinier and other Holocaust deniers as superior to the work of "mainstream" scholars; in 1993 Nolte wrote that "radical revisionists have presented research which, if one is familiar with the source material and the critique of the sources, is probably superior to that of the established historians of Germany"[79].
In 1992, Nolte again attracted controversy with a biography of his mentor, Martin Heidegger, whose turn to Nazism in the early 1930s was justified by Nolte under the grounds that in the context of the times, support for Nazis was a "rational" choice for a German to make[5]. Nolte argued that Heidegger was "''gerechtfertiger''" (justified) in joining the N.S.D.A.P. as in Nolte's view the only other alternative was the K.P.D.[81]. In April 1993, an exchange took place on the pages of the ''New York Review of Books'' between Thomas Sheehan and Nolte over the formerâs hostile review of Nolteâs biography of Heidegger. Nolte protested that Sheehan misquoted and misinterpreted some of his statements[82]. Sheehan in response to state that Nolte had deliberately engaged in selective misquotation of his review[82]. Perhaps in jest, Nolte described himself in his letter of protest as an âwicked revisionistâ[82].
Another controversy around Nolte was caused in 1994 when Nolte made a speech that maintained that there was much that was âpositiveâ about National Socialism, and that in his opinion, unfortunately too many historians had neglected the "positive" aspects of Nazism[85]. Since the ''Historikerstreit'', Nolte has became an increasing marginalized figure within the German historical profession. The reception on the part of most historians to his 1991 book ''Geschichtsdenken im 20. Jahrhundert'' (''Historical Thinking In the 20th Century'') was very hostile at best. In the latter work, Nolte asserted that the 20th century produced three âextraordinary statesâ, namely the Germany, Soviet Union, and Israel. Nolte claimed that all three âabnormal onceâ, but whereas the Soviet Union and Germany were now ânormalâ states, Israel was still an âabnormalâ state and was in Nolteâs view, in danger of becoming a fascist state that might commit genocide against the Palestinians. Many criticized Nolteâs book as both anti-Semitic and anti-Israeli, with its implied conclusion that there is a moral equivalence between Soviet Communism, German National Socialism and Israeli democracy. Another controversial work by Nolte was his 1998 book ''Historische Existenz''
(''Historical Existence''). An prominent theme of the latter book was a restatement of Nolte's view first expressed during the ''Historikerstreit'', that because a disproportionate number of Soviet partisans were Jews, the ''Einsatzgruppen'' massacres, which saw one million Soviet Jews shot in 1941-1942 were an acceptable counter-insurgency tactic that should not be regarded as either an war crime or an crime against humanity.
Between 1995-1997, Nolte via a series of letters had a debate with French historian François Furet over the relationship between fascism and Communism. The debate had been started by a footnote in Furet's book, ''Le Passé d'une illusion'' (''The Passing of an Illusion''), in which Furet had expressed his disagreement with Nolte's theories about Communism and fascism, leading Nolte to write a letter of protest to Furet. Furet argued that both ideologies were twins that shared the same origins, while Nolte repeated his views of fascism as a response to, and as a twin to Communism. After Furet's death, the letters were subsequently published in a book in France in 1997 as ''Fascisme et Communisme: échange épistolaire avec l'historien allemand Ernst Nolte prolongeant la Historikerstreit'' (''Fascism and Communism: Epistolary Exchanges With The German Historian Ernst Nolte Extending The Historikerstreit''), which was translated into English as ''Fascism and Communism'' in 2001.
Nolte often contributes ''Feulliton'' (opinion pieces) to German newspapers such as ''Die Welt'' and the ''Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung''. Most recently, in a 2006 interview, Nolte in a partial return to the theories he first expressed in ''The Three Faces of Fascism'', has written that Islamic fundamentalism is the third variant, after Communism and National Socialism of the âresistance to transcendenceâ, and has expressed regret that he will not have enough time to fully study Islamic fascism[86].
On June 4, 2000, Nolte was awarded the Konrad Adenauer Prize for Literature. The award attracted widespread protests and controversy. The man who delivered Nolte his award, Dr. Horst Möller, of the ''Institut fĂŒr Zeitgeschichte'' (Institute for Contemporary History), praised Nolteâs scholarship while trying to steer clear of Nolteâs more controversial claims. In his acceptance speech, Nolte commented that "We should leave behind the view that the opposite of National Socialist goals is always good and right" and that because of what in his view, was excessive Jewish support for Communism, that the Nazis might had "rational reasons" for their anti-Semitism[87]. In 2003-2004, Nolte was a prominent defender of Martin Hohmann, whose views about the ''Shoah'' were very similar to Nolte's. Some of Nolteâs claims made in his 1993 book ''Streitpunkte'' (''Points of Contention'') such as his assertion that historical understanding of the Holocaust has been âdistortedâ by âbiasedâ Jewish historians were recently favorably cited by a web-site maintained by the government of Iran promoting Holocaust denial. Currently, Nolte is a professor emeritus of contemporary history at the Free University of Berlin.
Work
★ ''Der Faschismus in seiner Epoche : die Action française der italienische Faschismus, der Nationalsozialismus'', MĂŒnchen : R. Piper, 1963, translated into English as ''The Three Faces of Fascism; Action Francaise, Italian Fascism, National Socialism'', London, Weidenfeld and Nicolson 1965.
★ ''Der Faschismus : von Mussolini zu Hitler. Texte, Bilder und Dokumente'', Munich: Desch, 1968.
★ ''Die Krise des liberalen Systems und die faschistischen Bewegungen'', Munich : R. Piper, 1968.
★ ''Sinn und Widersinn der Demokratisierung in der UniversitĂ€t'', Rombach Verlag: Freiburg, 1968.
★ ''Les Mouvements fascistes, l'Europe de 1919 a 1945'', Paris : Calmann-Levy, 1969.
★ ''Deutschland und der kalte Krieg'', Munich: R. Piper, 1974, ISBN 3492020925.
★ ''Theorien ĂŒber den Faschismus'', Köln : Kiepenheuer & Witsch, 1976, ISBN 346200607X.
★ "The Problem of Fascism In Recent Scholarship" pages 26-42 from ''Reappraisals of Fascism'' edited by Henry A. Turner, New York: Franklin Watts, 1976, ISBN 0-531-05372-5.
★ ''Die faschistischen Bewegungen : die Krise des liberalen Systems und die Entwicklung der Faschismen'', MĂŒnchen : Deutscher Taschenbuch-Verlag, 1977, ISBN 3423040041.
★ ''Marxismus, Faschismus, kalter Krieg: Vortrage u. Aufsatze 1964-1976'', Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt, 1977, translated into English as ''Marxism, Fascism, Cold War'', Assen, The Netherlands : Van Gorcum, 1982, ISBN 9023218779.
★ ''Marxismus und industrielle Revolution'', Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta, 1983, ISBN 3608911286.
★ "Between Myth and Revisionism? The Third Reich in the Perspective of the 1980s" pages 17-38 from ''Aspects of the Third Reich'' edited by H.W. Koch, St. Martin's Press, New York, 1985, ISBN 0333352726.
★ ''Der europĂ€ische BĂŒrgerkrieg 1917â1945: Nationalsozialismus und Bolschewismus'' Frankfurt : ProylĂ€en , 1987, ISBN 978-3776690033.
★ ''Das Vergehen der Vergangenheit : Antwort an meine Kritiker im sogenannten Historikerstreit'', Berlin : Ullstein, 1987, ISBN 978-3550072178.
★ ''Nietzsche und der Nietzscheanismus'', Frankfurt: PropylĂ€en, 1990, ISBN 978-3776621532.
★ ''LehrstĂŒck oder Tragödie?: BeitrĂ€ge zur Interpretation der Geschichte des 20. Jahrhunderts'', Böhlau 1991, ISBN 3412042919.
★ ''Geschichtsdenken im 20. Jahrhundert: Von Max Weber bis Hans Jonas'', Frankfurt: PropylĂ€en, 1991 , ISBN 3-549-05379-7.
★ ''Martin Heidegger: Politik und Geschichte im Leben und Denken'', Frankfurt: PropylĂ€en, 1992, ISBN 978-3549072417.
★ "The Past That Will Not Pass" pages 18-23 from ''Forever In The Shadow of Hitler?'' edited by Ernst Piper, Humanities Press, Atlantic Highlands, New Jersey, 1993, ISBN 0391037846.
★ ''Streitpunkte: Heutige und kunftige Kontroversen um den Nationalsozialismus'', Frankfurt: PropylĂ€en, 1993, ISBN 978-3549052341.
★ ''Die Deutschen und ihre Vergangenheiten: Erinnerung und Vergessen von der Reichsgrundung Bismarcks bis heute'', Frankfurt : PropylĂ€en, 1995, ISBN 3-7766-9004-6.
★ ''Historische Existenz: Zwischen Anfang und Ende der Geschichte?'', Munich: Piper 1998, ISBN 3492040705.
★ co-written with François Furet ''Fascisme et Communisme: Ă©change Ă©pistolaire avec l'historien allemand Ernst Nolte prolongeant la Historikerstreit'', Paris: Plon, 1998, translated into English by Katherine Golsan as ''Fascism and Communism'' with a preface by Tzvetan Todorov, Lincoln, Nebraska: University of Nebraska Press, 2001, ISBN 0803219954.
★ ''Der kausale Nexus. Ăber Revisionen und Revisionismen in der Geschichtswissenschaft; Studien, Artikel und VortrĂ€ge 1990â2000'', Herbig Verlag: Munich, 2002, ISBN 3-7766-2279-2.
★ ''Les Fondements historiques du national-socialisme'', Paris: Editions du Rocher, 2002.
★ ''L'ereditĂ del nazionalsocialismo'', Rome: Di Renzo Editore, 2003.
★ co-written with Siegfried Gerlich ''Einblick in ein Gesamtwerk'', Edition Antaios: Dresden 2005, ISBN 3-9350-6361-X.
★ ''Die Weimarer Republik. Demokratie zwischen Lenin und Hitler'', Herbig Verlag: Munich, 2006, ISBN 3-7766-2491-4.
Endnotes
1. Maier, Charles "Immoral Equivalence" pages 36-41 from the ''New Republic'', December 1, 1986 page 38.
2. Strute, Karl and Doelken, Theodor (editors) ''Who's Who In Germany 1982-1983'' Volume 2 N-Z, Verlag AG: Zurich, 1983 page 1194.
3. Strute, Karl and Doelken, Theodor (editors) ''Who's Who In Germany 1982-1983'' Volume 2 N-Z, Verlag AG: Zurich, 1983 page 1194.
4. Maier, Charles ''The Unmasterable Past'', Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1988 pages 26 & 42; Maier, Charles "Immoral Equivalence" from the ''New Republic'', December 1, 1986 page 38.
5. http://www.stanford.edu/dept/relstud/faculty/sheehan/pdf/NormalNa.pdf
6. Strute, Karl and Doelken, Theodor (editors) ''Who's Who In Germany 1982-1983'' Volume 2 N-Z, Verlag AG: Zurich, 1983 page 1194.
7. Griffin, Roger ''International Fascism'' Arnold: London, 1998 page 47
8. Griffin, Roger ''International Fascism'' Arnold: London, 1998 page 47
9. Griffin, Roger ''International Fascism'' Arnold: London, 1998 page 47
10. Griffin, Roger ''International Fascism'' Arnold: London, 1998 page 48
11. Maier, Charles ''The Unmasterable Past'' Harvard University Press: Cambridge, Massachusettes, 1988 pages 85-86.
12. Griffin, Roger ''International Fascism'' Arnold: London, 1998 pages 47-48
13. Kershaw, Ian The ''Nazi Dictatorship'', London: Arnold 1989 page 27.
14. Kershaw, Ian The ''Nazi Dictatorship'', London: Arnold 1989 page 27; Maier, Charles ''The Unmasterable Past'' Harvard University Press: Cambridge, Massachusettes, 1988 pages 86-87.
15. Kershaw, Ian The ''Nazi Dictatorship'', London: Arnold 1989 page 27; Maier, Charles ''The Unmasterable Past'' Harvard University Press: Cambridge, Massachusettes, 1988 pages 86-87.
16. Epstein, Klaus "A New Study of Fascism" pages 2-25 from ''Reappraisals of Fascism'' edited by Henry A. Turner, New York: Franklin Watts, 1976 pages 19-22.
17. Marrus, Michael ''The Holocaust In History'', Toronto : Lester & Orpen Dennys : Hanover : University Press of New England, 1987 pages 38-39.
18. Bauer, Yehuda ''Rethinking the Holocaust'' New Haven: Yale University Press, 2001 page 104
19. Griffin, Roger ''International Fascism'' Arnold: London, 1998 page 48
20. Griffin, Roger ''International Fascism'' Arnold: London, 1998 page 48.
21. Kershaw, Ian The ''Nazi Dictatorship'', London: Arnold 1989 page 27.
22. Maier, Charles ''The Unmasterable Past'' Harvard University Press: Cambridge, Massachusettes, 1988 pages 84-85, 87 & 100-101.
23. Maier, Charles ''The Unmasterable Past'', Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1988 page 87.
24. Lukacs, John ''The Hitler of History'' New York: Vintage Books, 1997, 1998 page 118.
25. Maier, Charles ''The Unmasterable Past'', Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1988 pages 27-28
26. Lukacs, John ''The Hitler of History'' New York: Vintage Books, 1997, 1998 page 35; Maier, Charles "Immoral Equivalence"from the ''New Republic'', December 1, 1986 page 38.
27. Evans, Richard J. ''In Hitler's Shadow'' New York: Pantheon Books, 1989 page 27.
28. Baldwin, Peter ''Reworking The Past'', Boston : Beacon Press, 1990 page 7.
29. Baldwin, Peter ''Reworking The Past'', Boston : Beacon Press, 1990 pages 7-8.
30. Baldwin, Peter ''Reworking The Past'', Boston : Beacon Press, 1990 page 8.
31. Maier, Charles ''The Unmasterable Past'', Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1988 page 28.
32. Baldwin, Peter ''Reworking The Past'', Boston : Beacon Press, 1990 page 8.
33. Baldwin, Peter ''Reworking The Past'', Boston : Beacon Press, 1990 page 9.
34. Baldwin, Peter ''Reworking The Past'', Boston : Beacon Press, 1990 pages 8-9.
35. Maier, Charles ''The Unmasterable Past'', Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1988 page 29.
36. Maier, Charles ''The Unmasterable Past'', Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1988 page 30.
37. Nolte, Ernst âBetween Myth and Revisionismâ pages 17-38 from ''Aspects of the Third Reich'', edited by H.W. Koch, New York: St. Martinâs Press, 1985 pages 35-36; Nolte, Ernst "The Past That Will Not Pass" pages 18-23 from ''Forever In The Shadow of Hitler?'' edited by Ernst Piper, Humanities Press, Atlantic Highlands, New Jersey, 1993 page 22.
38. Nolte, Ernst "The Past That Will Not Pass" pages 18-23 from ''Forever In The Shadow of Hitler?'' edited by Ernst Piper, Humanities Press, Atlantic Highlands, New Jersey, 1993 page 21; Evans, Richard J. ''In Hitler's Shadow'' New York: Pantheon Books, 1989 disputes Nolte's evidence for the "rat cage" torture being a common Bolshevik practice pages 37-38.
39. Baldwin, Peter ''Reworking The Past'', Boston : Beacon Press, 1990 page 5.
40. Baldwin, Peter ''Reworking The Past'', Boston : Beacon Press, 1990 page 5.
41. Nolte, Ernst âBetween Myth and Revisionismâ pages 17-38 from ''Aspects of the Third Reich'', edited by H.W. Koch, New York: St. Martinâs Press, 1985 pages 27-28.
42. Nolte, Ernst âBetween Myth and Revisionismâ pages 17-38 from ''Aspects of the Third Reich'', edited by H.W. Koch, New York: St. Martinâs Press, 1985 page 28.
43. Evans, Richard J. ''In Hitler's Shadow'' New York: Pantheon Books, 1989 page 28.
44. Maier, Charles The Unmasterable Past Harvard University Press: Cambridge, Massachusettes, 1988 pages 86-87
45. Baldwin, Peter ''Reworking The Past'', Boston : Beacon Press, 1990 pages 9-10.
46. Nolte, Ernst "Standing Things On Their Heads: Against Negative Nationalism In Interpreting History" pages 149-154 from ''Forever In The Shadow of Hitler?'' edited by Ernst Piper, Humanities Press, Atlantic Highlands, New Jersey, 1993 page 152; both Kershaw, Ian ''The Nazi Dictatorship'', London: Arnold, 1989 page 176 & Evans, Richard J. ''In Hitler's Shadow'' New York: Pantheon Books, 1989 page 37 claim that Nolte has taken Tucholsky's sardonic remark about chemical warfare in the future out of context.
47. Kershaw, Ian ''The Nazi Dictatorship'', London: Arnold, 1989 page 173.
48. http://www.codoh.com/thoughtcrimes/8706nolt.html.
49. http://www.codoh.com/thoughtcrimes/8706nolt.html.
50. Habermas, JĂŒrgen âA Kind of Settlement of Damages On Apologetic Tendencies In German History Writingâ pages 34-44 from ''Forever In the Shadow of Hitler?'' edited by Ernst Piper, Humanities Press, Atlantic Highlands, 1993 page 43.
51. Augstein, Rudolf "The New Auschwitz Lie" pages 131-134 from ''Forever In The Shadow of Hitler?'' edited by Ernst Piper, Humanities Press, Atlantic Highlands, New Jersey, 1993 pages 133-134.
52. JĂ€ckel, Eberhard "The Impoverished Practice of Insinuation: The Singular Aspect of National-Socialist Crimes Cannot Be Denied" pages 74-78 from ''Forever In The Shadow of Hitler?'' edited by Ernst Piper, Humanities Press, Atlantic Highlands, 1993 pages 77-78.
53. Mommsen, Hans "Search for the 'Lost History'?" pages 101-113 from ''Forever In The Shadow of Hitler?'' edited by Ernst Piper, Humanities Press, Atlantic Highlands, 1993 page 108.
54. Mommsen, Wolfgang J. "Neither Denial nor Forgetfulness Will Free Us" pages 202-215 from ''Forever In The Shadow of Hitler?'' edited by Ernst Piper, Humanities Press, Atlantic Highlands, 1993 pages 208-209.
55. Broszat, Martin "Where the Roads Part" pages 125-129 from ''Forever In The Shadow of Hitler?'' edited by Ernst Piper, Humanities Press, Atlantic Highlands, 1993 page 126.
56. Hildebrand, Klaus "The Age of Tyrants: History and Politics" pages 50-55 from ''Forever In The Shadow of Hitler?'' edited by Ernst Piper, Humanities Press, Atlantic Highlands, New Jersey, 1993 pages 54-55.
57. Fest, Joachim "Encumbered Remembrance: The Controversy about the Incomparability of National-Socialist Mass Crimes" pages 63-71 from ''Forever In The Shadow of Hitler?'' edited by Ernst Piper, Humanities Press, Atlantic Highlands, New Jersey, 1993 pages 64-65.
58. Nolte, Ernst "Letter to the Editor of ''Die Zeit'' August 1, 1986" pages 56-57 from ''Forever In The Shadow of Hitler?'' edited by Ernst Piper, Humanities Press, Atlantic Highlands, New Jersey, 1993 page 57.
59. Kershaw, Ian ''The Nazi Dictatorship'', London: Arnold, 1989 page 171.
60. Evans, Richard J. ''In Hitler's Shadow'' New York: Pantheon Books, 1989 page 177
61. Evans, Richard J. ''In Hitler's Shadow'' New York: Pantheon Books, 1989 pages 116-117
62. Thomas, Gina (editor) ''The Unresolved Past'', New York: St. Martin's Press, 1990 pages vii-viii.
63. Evans, Richard J. ''In Hitler's Shadow'' New York: Pantheon Books, 1989 page 38.
64. Evans, Richard J. ''In Hitler's Shadow'' New York: Pantheon Books, 1989 page 38.
65. Lukacs, John ''The Hitler of History'' New York: Vintage Books, 1997, 1998 pages 180-181.
66. Vidal-Naquet, Pierre ''Assassins of Memory'', New York: Columbia University Press, 1992 page 126.
67. Kershaw, Ian ''The Nazi Dictatorship'', London: Arnold, 1989 page 176.
68. Evans, Richard J. ''In Hitler's Shadow'' New York: Pantheon Books, 1989 pages 38-39.
69. Evans, Richard J. ''In Hitler's Shadow'' New York: Pantheon Books, 1989 page 31
70. Evans, Richard J. ''In Hitler's Shadow'' New York: Pantheon Books, 1989 pages 33-34, 42-43, 56, 82-83, 184-185; Kershaw, Ian ''The Nazi Dictatorship'', London: Arnold, 1989 pages 175-177.
71. Evans, Richard J. ''In Hitler's Shadow'' New York: Pantheon Books, 1989 pages 85-87
72. Evans, Richard J. ''In Hitler's Shadow'' New York: Pantheon Books, 1989 pages 152-153
73. Nolte, Ernst âBetween Myth and Revisionismâ pages 17-38 from ''Aspects of the Third Reich'', edited by H.W. Koch, New York: St. Martinâs Press, 1985 page 21.
74. Nolte, Ernst âBetween Myth and Revisionismâ pages 17-38 from ''Aspects of the Third Reich'', edited by H.W. Koch, New York: St. Martinâs Press, 1985 page 21.
75. Evans, Richard J. ''In Hitler's Shadow'' New York: Pantheon Books, 1989 pages 32-33.
76. Lukacs, John ''The Hitler of History'' New York: Vintage Books, 1997, 1998 page 229; Evans, Richard J. ''In Hitler's Shadow'' New York: Pantheon Books, 1989 pages 166-167.
77. Lipstadt, Deborah ''Denying the Holocaust'' New York: Free Press, 1993 pages 214-215.
78. http://www.jcpa.org/phas/phas-11.htm
79. Wistrich, Robert S. "Holocaust Denial" pages 293-301 from ''The Holocaust Encyclopedia'' edited by Walter Laqueur, New Haven: Yale University Press, 2001 page 299; Lukacs, John ''The Hitler of History'' New York: Vintage Books, 1997, 1998 page 233.
80. http://www.stanford.edu/dept/relstud/faculty/sheehan/pdf/NormalNa.pdf
81. Nolte, Ernst ''Martin Heidegger'', Frankfurt: PropylÀen, 1992 page 152.
82. http://www.nybooks.com/articles/2618
83. http://www.nybooks.com/articles/2618
84. http://www.nybooks.com/articles/2618
85. "Ein historisches Recht Hitlers"? Der Faschismus-Interpret Ernst Nolte ĂŒber den Nationalsozialismus, Auschwitz und die Neue Rechte' pages 83-103 from ''Der Spiegel'' , Volume 40, 1994.
86. http://www.welt.de/print-welt/article225060/Religion_vom_absoluten_Boesen.html.
87. http://www.osborne-conant.org/nolte.htm
References
★ Baldwin, Peter ''Reworking The Past : Hitler, the Holocaust, and the Historians' Debate'', Boston : Beacon Press, 1990 ISBN 0-8070-4302-8.
★ Bauer, Yehuda ''Rethinking the Holocaust'' New Haven: Yale University Press, 2001 ISBN 0-300-082256-8.
★ Craig, Gordon "The War of the German Historians" pages 16-19 from ''New York Review of Books'', February 15, 1987.
★ Epstein, Klaus "A New Study of Fascism" pages 2-25 from ''Reappraisals of Fascism'' edited by Henry Ashby Turner, New York: Franklin Watts, 1976, ISBN 0-531-05372-5.
★ Evans, Richard ''In Hitler's Shadow: West German Historians and the Attempt to Escape the Nazi Past'', New York, NY: Pantheon, 1989 ISBN 0-679-72348-X.
★ FriedlĂ€nder, Saul ''Memory, History, And The Extermination Of The Jews Of Europe'', Bloomington : Indiana University Press, 1993 ISBN 0-253-32483-1
★ Hirschfeld, Gerhard ''Erasing the Past?'' pages 8â10 from ''History Today'' Volume 37, Issue 8, August 1987.
★ Kershaw, Sir Ian ''The Nazi Dictatorship: Problems and Perspectives of Interpretations'', London: Arnold, 1989 ISBN 0-340-49008-X.
★ Griffin, Roger (editor) ''International Fascism Theories, Causes, and the New Consensus'', London: Arnold, 1998, ISBN 0 340 70613 9.
★ Lipstadt, Deborah ''Denying the Holocaust: The Growing Assault on Truth and Memory'', New York : Free Press ; Toronto : Maxwell Macmillan Canada ; New York ; Oxford : Maxwell Macmillan International, 1993, ISBN 0-02-919235-8.
★ Lukacs, John ''The Hitler of History'', New York : A. A. Knopf, 1997 ISBN 0-679-44649-4.
★ Maier, Charles ''The Unmasterable Past: History, Holocaust and German National Identity'', Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1988 ISBN ISBN 0-674-92975-6.
★ Maier, Charles "Immoral Equivalence" pages 36-41 from ''The New Republic'', Volume 195, Number 22, Issue 3, 750, December 1, 1986.
★ Marrus, Michael ''The Holocaust In History'', Toronto : Lester & Orpen Dennys : Hanover : University Press of New England, 1987 ISBN 0-88619-155-6.
★ Muller, Jerry "German Historians At War" pages 33-42 from ''Commentary'' Volume 87, Issue #5, May 1989.
★ Piper, Ernst (editor) ''Forever In The Shadow of Hitler? : Original Documents Of The Historikerstreit, The Controversy Concerning The Singularity Of The Holocaust'', translated by James Knowlton and Truett Cates, Atlantic Highlands, N.J. : Humanities Press, 1993 ISBN 0-391-03784-6.
★ Strute, Karl and Doelken, Theodor (editors) ''Who's Who In Germany 1982-1983'' Volume 2 N-Z, Verlag AG: Zurich, 1983, ISBN 0510-4009.
★ Thomas, Gina (editor) ''The Unresolved Past A Debate In German History'', New York: St. Martin's Press, 1990, ISBN 0-312-057996-2.
★ Vidal-Naquet, Pierre ''Assassins of Memory Essays on the Denial of the Holocaust'', New York: Columbia University Press, 1992, ISBN 0-231-07457-1.
★ Wistrich, Robert S. "Holocaust Denial" pages 293-301 from ''The Holocaust Encyclopedia'' edited by Walter Laqueur, New Haven: Yale University Press, 2001 ISBN 0-300-08432-3.
★ Wyden, Peter ''The Hitler Virus: The Insidious Legacy of Adolf Hitler'', Arcade Publishing, 2002, ISBN 1-55970-616-3.
External links
★ Ernst Nolte - personal website (in German)
★ Shades of Revisionism: Holocaust Denial and the Conservative Call to Reinterpret German History
★ Ernst Nolte and Holocaust Revisionism
★ Throwing Off Germany's Imposed History The Third Reich's Place in History A Conversation with Professor Ernst Nolte Readers of the Nolte article are strongly encouraged to read the IHR entry for information on his publishers, who are themselves controversial as Holocaust deniers and Nazi apologists.
★ Hitler Apologist Wins German Honor, and a Storm Breaks Out
★ The Logic of Horror by Götz Aly.
★ A Normal Nazi Review of Martin Heidegger by Ernst Nolte
★ Heidegger and Nazism: An Exchange
★ Interview with Ernst Nolte in French
★ Ernst Nolte and the Memory of the Shoah
This article provided by Wikipedia. To edit the contents of this article, click here for original source.
psst.. try this: add to faves
