How widespread was opposition and resistance

to Nazism, 1933-1939?

Advanced Higher History Dissertation

Adrian Scott

060039585

St. Stephen's High School

Word Count: 3,986

1 SCN 060039585

Contents

Introduction Page 2

Chapter One: Defining Opposition and Resistance Pages 3-4

Chapter Two: Political and Military Opposition and Resistance Pages 5-8

Chapter Three: Religious Opposition and Resistance Pages 9-11

Chapter Four: Individual Opposition and Resistance Pages 12-15

Conclusions Pages 16-17

Bibliography Page 18

2 SCN 060039585

Introduction

Ian Kershaw1 claimed that “the story of dissent, opposition, and resistance in the Third Reich is

indistinguishable from the story of consent, approval, and collaboration.” It is difficult to gauge

the extent of resistance to Nazism during Hitler’s reign due to a lack of public opinion polls but,

regardless, there is evidence of opposition to be found.

Opposition and resistance came in varying forms from many sectors of society. Political

opposition continued despite the Nazi ban on all other political parties and opposition was even

seen within the Nazi Party itself. Opposition of this nature was divided into two main factions –

conservatives who longed for the return of the Kaiser and socialists who wanted a “secondary

revolution”. However, historian Fest2 felt that the “secondary revolution” had been

misinterpreted to mean the desire for a true socialist revolution when in reality it was merely a

disguise for those who wanted power for themselves.

The Nazi treatment of German churches also led to opposition, particularly from various sectors

of Christianity. Furthermore, ordinary German opposition ranged from rebellious youth groups

to individuals who were tired of Hitler’s dictatorial method of governance. Each small act was

one of resistance, passive or active. However, the extent to which this opposition was spread

throughout the Third Reich and the true definitions of resistance requires further investigation.

Word Count: 220

1 Kershaw, I. (1989) The Nazi Dictatorship: Problems and Perspectives of Interpretation, 2nd ed. Kent: Edward Arnold 2 Hite, J. and Hinton, C. (2000) Advanced history core texts: Weimar & Nazi Germany. Dawson, I. (ed.) London: John Murray Ltd. p.175

3 SCN 060039585

Defining Opposition and Resistance

Resistance to the Nazi regime has been the subject of debate among historians and, since the

collapse of the Third Reich, several theories on the definition of resistance have been devised.

Kershaw divided resistance into three categories: resistance, opposition, and dissent3. While

dissent was limited to speaking out against the government, opposition meant opposing the

Nazis openly. Resistance went a step further and consisted of taking part in restricted practices,

making it the most common form of rebellion against the Nazis. Botz, however, presented

resistance as a pyramid split into a narrow spectrum of political resistance, a wider level of

social protest, and a base of deviant behaviour which could be as simple as worker

absenteeism4. Alternatively, historian Housden recognised eight levels of opposition, beginning

with forms of personal protection and ranging through open dissent at level four and low-key

conspiracies at level six to attempted revolution against the Nazi state.

However, historians have taken into account the risks associated with any form of resistance in

Nazi Germany. The concept of "resistenz" was devised to compensate for the repressive nature

of the regime and was "suggestive of a morally neutral impenetrability or immunity rather than

actively motivated opposition"5. This suggests that many Germans were not driven by a moral

imperative but by personal circumstance. Studying German resistance with the safety of

historical distance makes it difficult to comprehend the pressures felt by ordinary citizens in

Germany. It is not given to everyone to be heroes and it is unreasonable to apply an ideal to a

situation in which real people struggled to balance resistance and personal safety. As Kershaw

claims, the spectrum of dissent can only be understood when it is considered in light of its

relationship to the demands of an all-controlling regime which stressed "outward conformity".

The concept was introduced by Broszat who took the word from a medicinal root and used it to

describe any area of German existence which was not dominated by Nazism.

3 Layton, G. (2008) Opposition in the Third Reich. In: Germany: The Third Reich 1922-1945 for AQA, 2nd ed. London: Hodder

Education, pp.142-155 4 ibid. 5 Kershaw, I. (1989) The Nazi Dictatorship: Problems and Perspectives of Interpretation, 2nd ed. Kent: Edward Arnold

4 SCN 060039585

Similarly, those involved with the Bavaria Project, led by Broszat and intended as a

comprehensive look at the everyday nature of resistance, understood resistance to mean active

or passive behaviour which rejected any part of the Nazi ideology and involved some degree of

risk. This definition of resistance could range from refusal to give the Heil Hitler salute to openly

criticising Nazism from the pulpit to maintaining contact with "outsiders" such as Jews and

Communists.

Therefore, it is clear that the definition of resistance varies depending on what factors are

taken into consideration. For the purposes of examining the extent to which resistance was

widespread, this dissertation will consider all forms of active and passive resistance, regardless

of aims or success.

Word Count: 452

5 SCN 060039585

Political and Military Opposition and Resistance

Political resistance was by no means a new phenomenon of the Third Reich. Hans Rothfels6

claimed that active political resistance "represented merely a continuation of the battles" which

had been fought before the Nazi takeover of power. Upon gaining power, Hitler wasted no time

in outlawing all other political parties, leaving the Nazis as the only legal political organisation.

As a result, opposition from other political parties was effectively wiped out because they were

banned from taking their seats in the Reichstag and from holding party meetings. However, this

did not put an end to political opposition as Hitler had hoped and the Nazis faced a degree of

politically-motivated resistance.

Marxist historians have claimed that the efforts of communist resistors were instrumental in

liberating Germany from fascism. This view, albeit narrow, has been upheld to a degree by

other historians who have accepted communism as one of the most extensive levels of active

resistance. The Communist Party (KPD) saw 150,000 of its members imprisoned in

concentration camps between 1933 and 1939 and another 30,000 killed for acts of resistance.

The KPD had been the target of Nazi disdain almost since its inception and its demonisation was

often the subject of Nazi propaganda. However, due to an ever increasing SS-Gestapo presence,

the KPD were forced underground with approximately 10% of their original party membership

intact. Consequently, the opposition activities of the communists adapted to suit their

circumstances and they moved from public dissent to secret distribution of materials which

condemned Nazi acts of terror on the German people. During this period, the Gestapo

confiscated three million communist leaflets and the KPD leaders had fled to Russia by 1935

which left the resistance disorganised. However, while the KPD moved down the scales of

resistance defined by Housden, it is clear that their changing tactics were in direct response to

the increased threat of imprisonment. Though their efforts may have appeared small-scale and

overall ineffective, their previous methods would have resulted in their immediate

incarceration. Therefore, their attempts to oppose the Nazi regime can be included in the

6 Rothfels, H. (1970) The German Opposition to Hitler: An Appraisal. Chicago: Henry Regency Company

6 SCN 060039585

theory of "resistenz".

Many historians agree that the rift between the Social Democrats (SPD) and the KPD was

instrumental in allowing the Nazis to gain power in 1933 and this failure to cooperate continued

throughout the Third Reich. The SPD accused the KPD of sharing "a common cause with the

Nazis" and the parties proved unable to unite against a common enemy even after Hitler’s

assumption of power. The SPD opposed Hitler's attempts to seize power from the outset by

voting against the 1933 Enabling Act and, as a result, their leaders exiled themselves to Prague

to avoid arrest and established a system of underground resistance entitled SOPADE. The

organisation funded attempts at resistance within Germany such as the newspaper committee

who were arrested in 1935. However, geographically separated, leadership of the party became

unclear and the branches of the SPD resorted to infighting about how best to tackle the Nazi

threat. It is ironic, therefore, that this hostility for which they had condemned the KPD made

their attempted opposition for the most part ineffective (Palmier, 2006).

The SPD officially ended their opposition in 1938, deeming their activities to be too hazardous.

Also, not all members of the SPD engaged in resistance activities and "the majority withdrew

from political activity"7 which suggests that the SPD were not as committed to opposition as the

KPD. Therefore, while there was an attempt by the SPD and, subsequently, SOPADE to resist the

regime, their efforts were often in vain.

Another branch of political opposition came from the military which had been an organisation

of influence within the government due to its size and strength. Upon assuming power, Hitler

made the army swear an oath of loyalty to him which demanded unfaltering obedience and

willingness to die for the Fuhrer. Despite Hitler's removal of Blomberg and Fitch following their

objections surrounding German rearmament, the army was not fully under Hitler’s control.

Upon hearing of Hitler's plans to invade Czechoslovakia, General Lugwig Beck - an important

military figure - began attempting to convince senior officers to threaten resignation in protest

7 St Stephen’s High School (2014) Opposition and Resistance in Nazi Germany. [handout] November 2014. Port Glasgow: St Stephen’s High School

7 SCN 060039585

but there was general unwillingness to go against a direct order from Hitler8. Despite its failure

to materialise, Bullock9 argues that "the conspiracy reveals something of the dismay that was

felt in the Army High Command". Dissent and disobedience within the army remained towards

the end of 1939 as the threat of war became imminent. General Brauchitsch voiced his

anxieties concerning Hitler's plans to invade the west but Hitler's fury led Brauchitsch to

distance himself from the planned putsch which had been discussed at Army Headquarters in

Zossen.

Hitler's fear of opposition could be interpreted as knowledge of the fragility of the regime as it

stripped Germans of their rights. As proved by the Night of the Long Knives, he was not above

purging his own party of suspected opponents. Ernst Rohm, a member of the socialist faction of

the NSDAP and leader of the SA, had a great deal of power and was a known supporter of the

"secondary revolution" which would have fulfilled the socialist ideologies behind Nazism. Rohm

posed a threat to Hitler's leadership and used his position to demand the socialist philosophies

be upheld, a decision which cost him his life. After May 1933, Rohm's criticism of the regime

became more pronounced and he claimed Hitler was betraying the German people by

suspending the right to freedom of opinion. During what became known as the Night of the

Long Knives, approximately 77 leading Nazis - including many SA men and Rohm - in addition to

100 other Germans were murdered. The majority of those killed represented the left-wing of

the Nazi Party but Hitler took advantage of the situation to remove dissidents and opponents

who posed a threat. Therefore, it is clear that Hitler felt threatened by opposition and that his

attempts to wipe it out sent a clear signal to the German people that it would not be tolerated.

This can partly explain why the spread of resistance in the Third Reich may have been stilted.

According to historian Leber10, three million Germans were confined for political crimes against

the regime. This number alone suggests that a great many were willing to resist Hitler's

influence and, while many were imprisoned or even executed, the spirit of resistance was not

8 ibid 9 Bullock, A. (1954) Hitler: A Study in Tyranny. Liverpool: Odhams Press Ltd.

10 Evans, J. and Jenkins, J. (1999) Opposition to the Nazis. In: Years of Weimar, the Third Reich and Post-War Germany, 2nd ed. London: Hodder Education, pp. 305-322

8 SCN 060039585

quashed by intimidation. However, Peukert argues that "active resistance was only a minority

affair", suggesting organised political resistance was limited. This viewpoint implies that those

who were confined for political crimes were working alone.

In conclusion, political opposition to Nazism was, for the most part, disorganised and of little

consequence. Those attempting to resist the Nazis lacked a common purpose outside this and

often disagreed about the best way to proceed. The socialist branch of the NSDAP wanted a

socialist revolution while the SPD advocated a more democratic form of socialism. The KPD

promoted a communist revolution to oust the Nazis from power while the military wished to

prevent war. However, political resistance represented an important faction of opposition

despite its failings. Though largely unsuccessful in its aims to remove the Nazis from power, it

highlighted discontent and proved that the regime did not have total control over Germany.

Word Count: 1216

9 SCN 060039585

Religious Opposition and Resistance

At face value, Christianity and Nazism seemed worlds apart; Christians advocated acceptance

while the Nazis desired tyranny11. However, they shared many common views, promoting

family values and traditionalism. They also shared an outright hatred for communism and, to a

degree, anti-Semitism which was apparent within the Christian faith despite Jesus’ Judaism.

From the outset, Hitler’s goal was to demolish pre-existing German churches and replace them

with a faith which would teach Nazi ideology as religion. He aimed to replace Christianity with

the German Faith Movement though a clear religious ideology for Nazism never materialised.

From the beginning of his Chancellorship, Hitler praised the churches as central to German

society and the SA were encouraged to attend Protestant services. However, he privately

regarded the Churches as a “religious Versailles” and wished to reduce their influence. Hitler

signed the Concordat with the Pope which guaranteed the church religious freedoms in

exchange for the church not interfering with politics. The Nazis also granted the church control

over its education. However, the Nazis did not uphold their end of the bargain and closed

Church schools, undermined Catholic youth groups, and campaigned to remove crucifixes from

schools. These changes meant that the number of children attending faith schools fell from 65%

in 1935 to 5% in 1937. In response, Pope Pius XI attacked the Nazi system in 1937 in a public

letter entitled “With Burning Anxiety”. This went directly against the Nazi Concordat with the

Catholic Church and provided Hitler with an excuse to abandon the agreement and crucifixes

were removed from schools in 1937. However, the Catholic Church ran a successful campaign

to overturn this law. Some historians have argued that the reason why the Nazis struggled to

oppress Catholicism in Germany was due to its nature as a worldwide organisation with a

backlog of strength behind it.

The Protestant Church was also important when discussing opposition to Nazism. In particular,

the efforts of Martin Niemoller should be recognised. A Protestant pastor, he founded the

11 Hite, J. and Hinton, C. (2000) Advanced history core texts: Weimar & Nazi Germany. Dawson, I. (ed.) London: John Murray Ltd.

10 SCN 060039585

Confessional Church in direct opposition to Hitler’s Reich Church. The Confessional Church

recognised Christ as its head which was conflicted with Hitler’s insistence that the Fuhrer

should hold this position. The organisation was banned in 1935 having attracted over 500

clergymen and Niemoller was imprisoned in a concentration camp after a critical sermon

attacking Nazi racial policy. Niemoller also wrote this famous poem which explored the lack of

opposition to Nazism and opened with the lines:

“When the Nazis came for the Communists

I stayed quiet:

I was not a communist”

The poem highlights the unwillingness of the German people to stand up to Nazism due to fear

that they would be sent to concentration camps. Another prominent Protestant dissident was

Deitreich Bonhoeffer – co-founder of the Confessional Church - who vocally opposed the Nazi

euthanasia programme and persecution of the Jews. Both were arrested and sent to

concentration camps; only Niemoller survived. These individuals are a prime example of

resistance in Nazi Germany. However, as an organisation, Protestants were subject to influence

by the Nazis. Therefore, the Protestant church did not oppose Nazism but individuals within the

faith did. However, opposition was limited by the constraints of Nazi society.

In conclusion, Evans and Jenkins12 claim that the churches lacked the united moral front

required to effectively oppose the Nazis and so religious opposition was limited. The Catholic

Church was possibly the most successful in resisting Nazism due to its status as a worldwide

community which may have led to feelings of security and support among German Catholics.

Some historians argue that spiritual resistance was important in maintaining morale. Many

Jews in particular remained in Germany with the hope that life would improve. However, the

Protestant Churches stood opposed to Nazism in small numbers and the contribution of select

individuals should be recognised as religious resistance to Nazism. The Nazi ideology conflicted

12 Evans, J. and Jenkins, J. (1999) Opposition to the Nazis. In: Years of Weimar, the Third Reich and Post-War Germany, 2nd ed.

London: Hodder Education, pp. 305-322

11 SCN 060039585

with the majority of religious teachings and Hitler’s attempts to set up a Reich church in order

to reduce the German worship of a power other than himself ultimately failed. Though he was

successful in reducing the official influence of the church, most Germans remained true to their

faith despite being unable to practice.

Word Count: 697

12 SCN 060039585

Individual Opposition and Resistance

Broszat's theory of "resistenz" comes into play most strongly when assessing the extent of

resistance among ordinary Germans, many of whom did not have the resources to attempt a

revolt. Instead, they engaged in smaller acts of resistance which proved beneficial for the

German psyche and acknowledged the tremendous acts of bravery performed by non-

conformists in Nazi Germany.

Passive resistance was the most prevalent form of resistance in Nazi Germany with millions

participating on various levels every day. Passive resistance ranged from simple non-

cooperation with new laws to engaging in peaceful demonstration13. In some cases, it extended

to providing Jewish families with refuge. Passive resistance was debatably the most successful

form of resistance because Hitler did, on occasion, respond to strong public opinion. The

German people successfully restored crucifixes in schools and influenced the restrictions placed

on the Law for the Protection of Hereditary Health (1993) which condoned the sterilisation and

murder of the physically and mentally disabled14. Similarly, the Nazis became adamantly anti-

tobacco during the 1930s but saw tobacco use rise as a result, highlighting that the spirit of

German resistance had not been completely suppressed. Therefore, though not considered

particularly effective from a revolutionary standpoint, small acts of resistance were good for

the German psyche and allowed ordinary Germans to play their part in opposing the regime.

For this same reason, humour became a prominent feature of German life - particularly that

which was critical of Hitler and the Nazis. Hillenband15, a German who lived under the Nazi

regime, reported that "many people found the telling of [anti-Nazi] jokes their only means of

protest" which suggests that many citizens were limited in their ability to oppose the regime

and that their consent was not wholly down to apathy or agreement. It was, however,

dangerous to make such jokes in public due to the possibility of SS spies overhearing.

13 Evans, J. and Jenkins, J. (1999) Opposition to the Nazis. In: Years of Weimar, the Third Reich and Post-War Germany, 2nd ed.

London: Hodder Education, p.307 14 ibid 15 Hite, J. and Hinton, C. (2000) Advanced history core texts: Weimar & Nazi Germany. Dawson, I. (ed.) London: John Murray Ltd.

p.329

13 SCN 060039585

Therefore, humour was a very private form of dissidence which ranked third on Housden's scale

of resistance16.

Resistance within the youth movement took several forms and varied in intensity, ranging from

the actively resistant Edelweiss Pirates to the Swing and Jazz Youth who were mainly concerned

with self-expression as a right and not a political statement. Members of the Edelweiss Pirates

did not belong to the Hitler Youth, an act of rebellion in itself as membership became

compulsory in 1939. Initially, they had no political agenda and operated mainly in working-class

areas of western Germany. McDonough17 argues that many of the activities undertaken by the

Edelweiss Pirated encompassed a natural youthful rebellion such as growing out their hair and

singing parodies of Hitler Youth songs. They went on long hikes during periods of reduced

transportation, again going deliberately against Nazi attempts to restrict the freedoms of

citizens even further.

Similarly, the Swing and Jazz Youth showed a profound desire for self-expression and their

resistance centred around non-conformity and rebellion against the rigidity of Nazi culture. The

Swing Youth were notorious for organising illegal dances which were attended by up to 6,000

German young people. On a similar vein, the Jazz Youth founded illegal clubs where dances

took place though many were discovered and shut down by the Gestapo. The Jazz and Swing

Youth listened to banned "negro" music, particularly from America, such as the Glenn Millar

Orchestra or Louis Armstrong just as the Edelweiss Pirates listened to music by banned Jewish

composers. This highlights the distinct political difference between the two groups - the Swing

and Jazz Youth rebelled against uniformity in a similar manner to the later "Hippie Movement"

in the UK in the 1960s while the Edelweiss Pirates made political and social statements by

rebelling against the Nazi views on race and conformity. Furthermore, the Swing and Jazz Youth

were typically upper-middle class and so were socially worlds apart from the working class

Edelweiss Pirates. Himmler claimed that anyone who enjoyed jazz music should be "beaten,

given the severest exercise, and then put to hard labour" which introduced the element of risk. 16 Layton, G. (2008) Opposition in the Third Reich. In: Germany: The Third Reich 1922-1945 for AQA, 2nd ed. London: Hodder

Education, pp.142-155

17 McDonough, F. (2001) Opposition and resistance in Nazi Germany. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

14 SCN 060039585

Therefore, both the Edelweiss Pirates and the Swing and Jazz Youth organisations represented

small-scale dissent and resistance to the Nazi regime though they made up "a substantial

minority of German youth"18.

In addition to youth organisations, many brave individuals engaged in resistance to the regime,

one example being Oscar Gompertz - a Jew who saw his home invaded by SS men during

Kristallnacht. In an act of gallantry, he challenged the soldiers and refused to go with them

quietly. Instead, he presented the Iron Cross which he had won during the Great War, having

fought alongside Hitler in defence of the same nation. This act of bravery was rewarded when

his family and possessions were spared the devastation faced by other Jewish families across

the country that night. The Gompertz family escaped abroad19. Although this resistance was

isolated, it symbolised the strength of the ordinary German and highlighted to a small minority

of SS men the flaws with Hitler's racial policy. As Kershaw20 states, "the extermination of the

Jews was ultimately a 'policy' which contradicted rationality".

In conclusion, the importance of the resistance of ordinary Germans cannot be overlooked.

While it achieved little in the way of political success, it made a statement that the German

people were not entirely willing to surrender themselves to a dictatorship. Youth organisations,

though taking part in natural teenage rebellion, actively fought against the repressive Nazi

regime and displayed remarkable courage and dissatisfaction with the Nazi rule. Hitler's regime

was dependent on the undying loyalty of young people in Germany and, as such, this resistance

was of vital importance to the collapse of the Third Reich as it prevented the conditioning of

German children to adopt Hitler's racist and sexist ideals while encouraging individuality,

another trait which was devastating to Hitler's success. In addition, the resistance of individuals

such as Oscar Gompertz demonstrated the remarkable bravery of the German people. While

these successes were of little national significance, they sent an incredibly important message

to other targeted groups that there was hope for them, thus encouraging further acts of

18 ibid 19 BBC (2007) Days that shook the world: Kristallnacht and the Birth of Israel. [DVD] London: BBC Worldwide Ltd.

20 Kershaw, I. (1989) The Nazi Dictatorship: Problems and Perspectives of Interpretation, 2nd ed. Kent: Edward Arnold

15 SCN 060039585

opposition. Passive resistance was much more widespread throughout Germany but this does

not mean it was more successful or effective as it did not oppose the Nazi regime to the same

extent as other organisations. Therefore, though grassroots German resistance was not

widespread, it acted as a platform for dissent, thus allowing anti-Nazi ideas to be heard and

considered.

Word Count: 1074

16 SCN 060039585

Conclusion

The debate concerning the extent of opposition and resistance in Nazi Germany is ongoing.

Historians disagree about how to define resistance when relating it to Nazism and the idea of

"resistenz" comes closest to identifying the extent of opposition. However, it is limited in its

outlook as it fails to consider the motivations behind resistant actions and, therefore, cannot

accurately assess the extent to which people were opposed to Nazism itself. It is clear that

those who attempted to oppose the regime did so for very different reasons. For example, the

army wished to prevent further war and the KPD wanted a communist revolution while most

ordinary Germans who resisted the regime wished only for their freedoms to be returned to

them.

Therefore, it is difficult to determine what can be classed as resistance. However, it is clear that

resistance was present in Nazi Germany to varying degrees among religious and political groups

and ordinary German citizens. However, most forms of opposition were not widespread due to

the limitations of propaganda and the Gestapo. In terms of popularity, passive resistance and

dissent were the most widespread forms of opposition and often took the form of anti-Nazi

jokes. Passive resistance was characterised by a lack of expected action and many Germans

engaged in it by simply failing to conform to the new ideas set out by the regime, continuing

with traditional German culture, and failing to join the Hitler Youth.

Other forms of opposition, however, were not so widespread. While priests and pastors voiced

their concerns, the Church did first and foremost sign a concordat with the government

promising to stay out of Nazi policy. Furthermore, political opposition was forced underground

by the presence of SS-Gestapo spies. As Layton21 states, “the real threat posed by those who

opposed the regime was fairly limited”.

Therefore, while opposition and resistance did exist in Nazi Germany, the repressive nature of

21 Layton, G. (2008) Opposition in the Third Reich. In: Germany: The Third Reich 1922-1945 for AQA, 2nd ed. London: Hodder

Education, pp.142-155

17 SCN 060039585

the regime meant that the spread of resistant ideas was limited.

Word Count: 327

18 SCN 060039585

Bibliography

BBC (2007) Days that shook the world: Kristallnacht and the Birth of Israel. [DVD] London: BBC

Worldwide Ltd.

Bullock, A. (1954) Hitler: A Study in Tyranny. Liverpool: Odhams Press Ltd.

Cameron, R., Robertson, C. and Henderson, C. (1992) The Nazi Dictatorship in Germany under

Hitler. In: Germany and Italy 1815-1939: The growth of nationalism. Fenwick: Pulse

Publications, pp.114-126.

Evans, J. and Jenkins, J. (1999) Opposition to the Nazis. In: Years of Weimar, the Third Reich and

Post-War Germany, 2nd ed. London: Hodder Education, pp. 305-322

Hite, J. and Hinton, C. (2000) Advanced history core texts: Weimar & Nazi Germany. Dawson, I.

(ed.) London: John Murray Ltd.

Kershaw, I. (1989) The Nazi Dictatorship: Problems and Perspectives of Interpretation, 2nd ed.

Kent: Edward Arnold

Layton, G. (2008) Opposition in the Third Reich. In: Germany: The Third Reich 1922-1945 for

AQA, 2nd ed. London: Hodder Education, pp.142-155

McDonough, F. (2001) Opposition and resistance in Nazi Germany. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press

Palmier, J.M. (2006) Weimar in Exile: the antifacist emigration in Europe and America.

Translated from French by David Fernbach. New York: Verso (p. 198)

Presinger, A.A. (1991) The Church Struggle in Nazi Germany, 1933-34: Resistance, Opposition, or Compromise. PhD dissertation, [online] Texas: Texas Tech University. Available at: http://www.academia.edu/912452/The_Church_Struggle_In_Nazi_Germany_1933-34_Resistance_Opposition_Or_Compromise Rothfels, H. (1970) The German Opposition to Hitler: An Appraisal. Chicago: Henry Regency Company St Stephen’s High School (2014) Opposition and Resistance in Nazi Germany. [handout] November 2014. Port Glasgow: St Stephen’s High School