Gestapo comments about second leaflet

Yesterday’s expert analysis, page 3, number 4, Christian overtones: This now comes clearly into view. Christian expressions multiply. … D 33, It is not given to us. D 48, May God grant that. Corresponding to the archaic relative pronoun “so”, here there likewise appears the unmistakable sign of theological method of speech, “now there our eyes are opened” [Note 1] (D 79). D 76 is the fanatical call of a hellfire-and-brimstone preacher.

Yesterday’s expert analysis, page 4, number 8: Caution regarding propaganda. D 36 demonstrates the same reserve with regards to the Jewish question. …

Yesterday’s expert analysis, page 6, 2nd paragraph: I determined that the appeals did not have the tone of an embittered loner. … [As] in B – complains about their indifference ( C 3 ff., D 5 ff.).

I described the author as an intellectual. In the new material, this is once again clearly evident. The author cites largely unknown passages from Goethe and Schiller, and in addition, Novalis, Aristotle, and Lao-Tse. … D 20, of “the German intelligentsia in the prison of the cellar” [Note 2]. …

Inconsistencies and flawed logic resurface (compare yesterday’s expert analysis page 4, No. 7). In D 15, it states that the true nature of National Socialism became evident only after they came to power, but in D 82, it was the outbreak of war that made it evident. …

The intellectual soil from which this author originates reminds me most of Wilhelm Stapel: Here we have the same connection between nationalism [Note 3], modified anti-Semitism, and a political theology that stems from Protestantism, yet which demonstrates interdenominational tendencies. For further examination of these theses, I will first have to acquire the material.

In addition, the author apparently gets nourishment from steady, fairly banal, foreign propaganda, that I am familiar with from my domicile abroad. I would assume that this propaganda comes from foreign [radio] broadcasts, but I do not have any means to test this theory [Note 4]. The following belongs in this category: Preaching of passive resistance; the expression “fascist” with regards to National Socialism, since this expression originated with the Bolshevists; talk of the great losses on the Eastern Front as early as last summer; and finally, the critique of Adolf Hitler’s style in Mein Kampf. …

The author has absolutely no serious positive agenda [to offer]. This is even clearer in C – F. He wants to rally opposition (D 23), and passive resistance should be set in motion. But how this is to be coordinated with the militaristic necessities of war is never addressed at all (E 59). This speaks to the same naïveté [described earlier] and even more clearly to the complete irresponsibility of the author.

==========

General Note: In Harder’s memorandum, C = Leaflet 1 by Hans Scholl, D = Leaflet 2 by Hans Scholl and Alexander Schmorell, E = Leaflet 3 by Hans Scholl and Alexander Schmorell, F = Leaflet 4 by Hans Scholl, A = Leaflet 5 by Hans Scholl, B = Leaflet 6 by Kurt Huber. I have extracted only the analysis of Leaflet 2 in this post. – Note that dating as June 28, 1942 is based the date the first leaflets were mailed (around July 1) minus a few days.

Note 1: Jetzt da uns die Augen geöffnet sind. Difficult to render Luther’s “Lutheran” German in English. Similar to King James English.