What was life like in Berlin in the 1940s?

Ursula von Kardoff was a German journalist. At the time of the Third Reich, she worked as a journalist for various journals, among them the Deutsche Allgemeine Zeitung in Berlin; she worked there until early spring 1945.

What was the social climate like?

For starters, it’s clear from Ursula’s journaling that not all Germans were sympathizers of the regime; at least, she paints it that way. At private gatherings, as she writes, people talked freely, stating their discontent with the regime. Ursula even discussed the possibility of overthrowing the regime with her friend Martin Raschke; she recorded that on 17 November 1942. Some of her friends were even involved in the 20 July 1944 attempt to assassinate Hitler.

On the other hand, there were people disconnected from reality. As recorded in von Kardoff’s accounts, many Germans were oblivious to the regime’s repression and undoing. On 13 December 1942 she writes: Went to early service in the Gedächtniskirche. A dull sermon, quite out of touch with reality, taking no account of what is going on in the world. A similar sentiment is recorded in March 1943 when she writes: Most people’s attitude is one of complete indifference – like that of T., who said to me the other day, “Why should I care about the Jews? The only thing I think about is my brother, at Rshev, and I couldn’t care less about anything else.”

Moreover, von Kardoff writes that she was aware of the things going on in the world because of her brothers and friends, from whom she had to say goodbye too many times. She almost sequences all the goodbyes she had to say. The hardest for her was saying farewell to her brothers who fought on the side of the Nazis. Ursula writes that they did what they had to; disobedience was not a choice. Not as early as 1942, however, but in the following year we see that things started to change.

Against the regime

Ursula uses interesting words to describe what was happening in Nazi Germany. For instance, she wrote: The fronts stretch farther and farther. Now we have occupied the other half of France. She does not escape responsibility; she uses the pronoun we, as she and all Germans occupied the other half of France. In one way, they did by voting for dictatorship. (Were they aware of whom they voted for in the 1930s?)

Furthermore, Ursula’s father loved the following quote:

“What must we do know? One man says,        Der eine fragt: Was kommt danach?

The other, “Is that really so?”                              Der andere fragt nur: Ist es recht,

Thus they display the difference                                      Und also unterscheidet sich

Between the free man and the serf.                                 Der Freie von dem Knecht.

In the saying of Ursula’s father, it is clear where they as a family stood regarding the Third Reich. Ursula herself referred to Germans as a nation of serfs, ones who cannot decide for themselves, ones without free will. She painted it as if Germans did not have the power to resist the government they chose for themselves. As if they were so manipulated (or maybe naïve) that they were not aware of the crimes the Nazi Party would commit. But is her portrait of anti-Nazi Germany justified?

Moreover, as early as 1943, the illusion of winning the war started to crumble. Germans, pro- or anti-Nazism, became conscious of reality. Von Kardoff writes: A heavy raid yesterday. A roof was on fire near us … People formed a chain of buckets and Mamma and I helped. Germans started to turn against Nazism. The main sign that Germany was losing the war was the Allied bombing of Berlin. Terror came in 1945 with the entry of the Soviet Red Army into Berlin (and later the US, French and British Army), especially for women who, as Ursula writes, were brutally raped by both. The so-called “liberators” proved to be as brutally mean as the “Nazi foe.”

Helping the “enemy”

Furthermore, the von Kardoff family showed sympathy and empathy toward the mistreated, in this case Jews. She writes about helping Jews and how careful they had to be when delivering clothes or food to them. Von Kardoff describes one visit on 28 December 1942 when she and her friend had to ring the doorbell three times and pause before the fourth ring for the Jew to let them in. They had to be cautious; otherwise, they risked being detained. Writing so late about her and her friends’ solidarity with Jews leaves the question: were they supportive of Jews in the 1930s when the laws against them were passed?

Throughout the years under Nazism, Ursula describes tensions among people and the ever-present paranoia. Helping or hiding Jews meant prison or even death. Fear of the Gestapo was rising. Repression, according to Ursula, tightened after the attempt to assassinate Hitler on 20 July 1944. This time, repression was not only directed toward Jews but toward everyone who was suspicious. Here von Kardoff also writes about the arrests and disappearances of her friends. The regime Germans voted for turned against them - or had it been against them all along?

How to read Diary of a Nightmare?

Finally, looking at the writing itself, it seems that von Kardoff edited some parts of the manuscript. The entries in the diary are sparse (at least at the beginning), as if the author deliberately chose what to leave in and what to erase from publication. Keeping in mind Ursula’s intention of repairing postwar Germany’s reputation, it might be that she edited her diary to fit the narrative of Germany being a victim of the Nazi Party, and also to highlight that Germans knew of the Nazis’ crimes.

That being said, the events depict the harsh reality of living under a totalitarian regime, even for those who opposed it. Ursula vividly describes wartime destruction using the example of the Allied bombing of Berlin, hiding in shelters, famine and despair, and constant alertness.

To sum up, Ursula gives us two spaces: private circles and public spaces. The first is where people feel free to express discontent with the political situation; the other is more cautious and indifferent. This raises the question of whether silence and passiveness amount to consent to injustice. In other words, choosing silence is choosing participation.

Would you stand up for the mistreated, even if they did not share your beliefs? And can silence be understood as a form of participation?

Discover more! Sign up for more in-depth analysis.

#ursulavonkardoff #vonkardoff #diaryofanightmare #berlin #worldwartwo #diary #nazicm #regime #repression #dictatorship

Sources:

Von Kardoff, Ursula, Diary of a Nightmare: Berlin 1942 – 1945, New York: The John Day Company