Voice of America, part II
[continued from here]
Nazi leaders had worked hard to associate America with lack of culture and Jewish domination. But average Germans had long since embraced many aspects of American life, and this continued during the war. They danced to "decadent" jazz records from the States even after 1941. "Mickey Mouse was so popular that it appeared on the coat of arms of a German battalion."
The Neue Zeitung constantly was under pressure from various U.S. military authorities, despite their common goal of introducing democracy to Germans. The émigrés, many of them leftists, picked and chose from the menu of American life for ideals they thought worthy of or appropriate for German life.
That Coudenhove-Kalergi piece (titled "Der Optimismus Amerikas"), from the Dec. 21, 1945, Neue Zeitung is deeply resonant for U.S.-European relations today. It also can say a lot about internal American political dichotomies in this age of wars of liberation and terrorism. It can illuminate a land that some people look at and see freedom on the march and others look at and see a cesspool of repression and torture. Just so, the small but significant omission that converts "pursuit of happiness" to "right of happiness" can explain much that covers the same ground.
Letters to the editor and readership polls in the Neue Zeitung showed strong disapproval of the "Nuremberg Trials" in 1946. "[M]any readers doubted the legitimacy of an international court in which the victors judged the losers after having vanquished them militarily." No doubt the Germans felt this because they identified with the defendants. Their excuses of "just following orders" could have applied, more or less, to most Germans who had survived the war, who, regardless of their personal beliefs, occupied some position in the gray area between active and enthusiastic cooperation with the Third Reich and open resistance to it. Most had simply kept their heads down and followed orders when they could not avoid them. They knew the distinction between "good" and "bad" Germans was artificial and false.
The letters to the editor were a sore point with U.S. authorities. At the end of the first year, an official report counted a total of 140,000 letters. By September 1947, ten employees did nothing but read letters to the editor. A great many of them sounded off criticizing this or that aspect of the U.S. occupation. After 12 years of Goebbels' censorship, the outpouring was remarkable. "Habe welcomed this outspoken critique as a manifestation of democratic freedom and willingness to think."
But one critical report on the paper from U.S. authorities, in April 1946, wrote, "A quarter of a million American lives were not lost, and untold billions of dollars spent, for us now to fear German public opinion. We did not fear German reaction to American ideas and life while our troops were hammering at Germany's front lines. Why now, with victory in our hands, should we be afraid to tread on Germany's ideological toes?" The harsh criticism of the paper even extended to its bad reviews of second-rate Hollywood movies, reviews which were slammed as "sabotage."
Habe fought to keep his paper in its position. Some wanted to quickly re-license the German media and put the news back in local hands. He petitioned against this. He also resisted pressure to "Americanize" the Neue Zeitung. As early as November 1945 he battled a dictum to print at least two American authors for every German writer, in part by scanning his superiors' list of "German" authors among those the paper had given ink to so far -- 74 percent, so the bureaucrat said -- and discovering Carl Sandburg and John Steinbeck on the list. The superior lamely responded that since they were Teutonic names, "the Germans will take them for Germans," but it's hard to resist the conclusion that Habe had scored a point.
Yet a greater problem for Habe's superiors was that they never could be clear on what they meant by "American" views or news.
And they did so as well by giving reign to the free exchange of ideas and the competitive interplay of the written word. That, more than any front-page design or feature article or the letters in the author's name, marked an American newspaper and a free press.
[to be continued]
Nazi leaders had worked hard to associate America with lack of culture and Jewish domination. But average Germans had long since embraced many aspects of American life, and this continued during the war. They danced to "decadent" jazz records from the States even after 1941. "Mickey Mouse was so popular that it appeared on the coat of arms of a German battalion."
The Neue Zeitung constantly was under pressure from various U.S. military authorities, despite their common goal of introducing democracy to Germans. The émigrés, many of them leftists, picked and chose from the menu of American life for ideals they thought worthy of or appropriate for German life.
While rejecting the notions of unlimited capitalism, economic individualism, and unrestrained freedom, the editors praised the educational advantages, the functional optimism and idealism, and the guaranteed right to the 'pursuit of happiness' in the United States. 'What is the basic difference between the American and the European spirit?' the pan-European socialist Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi asked. 'The foremost difference is the gap between American optimism and European pessimism. European pessimism may be one of the reasons why Europe failed in its great effort to lead the world. American optimism will be a great plus for fulfilling this task.' Europeans regarded the American belief in mankind's goodness as naive. Americans, in turn, found Europeans' cynicism and fear of the evil in mankind troublesome. 'You cannot believe in democracy without being an optimist,' Coudenhove-Kalergi continued. 'Democracy is identical with the idea that people can live in freedom without abusing it.' Germans had to recognize the 'right to happiness' as a purpose in life, not as a side effect.
That Coudenhove-Kalergi piece (titled "Der Optimismus Amerikas"), from the Dec. 21, 1945, Neue Zeitung is deeply resonant for U.S.-European relations today. It also can say a lot about internal American political dichotomies in this age of wars of liberation and terrorism. It can illuminate a land that some people look at and see freedom on the march and others look at and see a cesspool of repression and torture. Just so, the small but significant omission that converts "pursuit of happiness" to "right of happiness" can explain much that covers the same ground.
Letters to the editor and readership polls in the Neue Zeitung showed strong disapproval of the "Nuremberg Trials" in 1946. "[M]any readers doubted the legitimacy of an international court in which the victors judged the losers after having vanquished them militarily." No doubt the Germans felt this because they identified with the defendants. Their excuses of "just following orders" could have applied, more or less, to most Germans who had survived the war, who, regardless of their personal beliefs, occupied some position in the gray area between active and enthusiastic cooperation with the Third Reich and open resistance to it. Most had simply kept their heads down and followed orders when they could not avoid them. They knew the distinction between "good" and "bad" Germans was artificial and false.
The letters to the editor were a sore point with U.S. authorities. At the end of the first year, an official report counted a total of 140,000 letters. By September 1947, ten employees did nothing but read letters to the editor. A great many of them sounded off criticizing this or that aspect of the U.S. occupation. After 12 years of Goebbels' censorship, the outpouring was remarkable. "Habe welcomed this outspoken critique as a manifestation of democratic freedom and willingness to think."
But one critical report on the paper from U.S. authorities, in April 1946, wrote, "A quarter of a million American lives were not lost, and untold billions of dollars spent, for us now to fear German public opinion. We did not fear German reaction to American ideas and life while our troops were hammering at Germany's front lines. Why now, with victory in our hands, should we be afraid to tread on Germany's ideological toes?" The harsh criticism of the paper even extended to its bad reviews of second-rate Hollywood movies, reviews which were slammed as "sabotage."
Habe fought to keep his paper in its position. Some wanted to quickly re-license the German media and put the news back in local hands. He petitioned against this. He also resisted pressure to "Americanize" the Neue Zeitung. As early as November 1945 he battled a dictum to print at least two American authors for every German writer, in part by scanning his superiors' list of "German" authors among those the paper had given ink to so far -- 74 percent, so the bureaucrat said -- and discovering Carl Sandburg and John Steinbeck on the list. The superior lamely responded that since they were Teutonic names, "the Germans will take them for Germans," but it's hard to resist the conclusion that Habe had scored a point.
Yet a greater problem for Habe's superiors was that they never could be clear on what they meant by "American" views or news.
Confusing "American" with "democratic," they regarded the customs, the products and the journalistic practices of the United States as pillars of democracy. They felt they had fought the war for the American way of life. They failed to see that by catering to German Kultur, the editors successfully communicated some uniquely American values.
And they did so as well by giving reign to the free exchange of ideas and the competitive interplay of the written word. That, more than any front-page design or feature article or the letters in the author's name, marked an American newspaper and a free press.
[to be continued]
Labels: Cold War, journalism, Neue Zeitung, World War II
