"Exploring the culture and worldview of socialist secularism and its impact on German history, this book reveals the educational efforts of red secularists to transmit to workers their humanistic-materialistic worldview and their crucial role in the political struggles over religion which fed into the National Socialist dictatorship of 1933"--
Negotiating the boundaries of the secular and of the religious is a core aspect of modern experience. In mid-nineteenth-century Germany, secularism emerged to oppose church establishment, conservative orthodoxy, and national division between Catholics, Protestants, and Jews. Yet, as historian Todd H. Weir argues in this provocative book, early secularism was not the opposite of religion. It developed in the rationalist dissent of Free Religion and, even as secularism took more atheistic forms in Freethought and Monism, it was subject to the forces of the confessional system it sought to dismantle. Similar to its religious competitors, it elaborated a clear worldview, sustained social milieus, and was integrated into the political system. Secularism was, in many ways, Germany's fourth confession. While challenging assumptions about the causes and course of the Kulturkampf and modern antisemitism, this study casts new light on the history of popular science, radical politics, and social reform
AbstractThis article shows the significant role played by religious politics in the German Revolution of 1918. It examines first how the secularist subculture within German socialism contributed to the formation of wartime opposition that led to the 1917 split of the Social Democratic Party (SPD). It then follows the actions of secularists during the revolution itself, beginning with the attempts of one of Germany's most prominent secularists, Adolph Hoffmann, to force through a radical program of secularization upon assuming a key position in the revolutionary government of 1918. It traces the politics of religion in the writing of the Weimar Constitution before taking up the relationship of secularism to the "pure" council movement, which emerged in the years from 1919 to 1922 as an alternative both to parliamentary democracy and Bolshevik party rule.
In: Weir , T H 2017 , ' "Der Untergang des Abendlandes wird ekklesiologisiert." Ein Kulturkampf am Ende der Weimarer Republik ' , Historisches Jahrbuch , vol. 137 , pp. 327-350 . ; ISSN:0018-2621
This article contends that Christian anxieties over secularism played a significant role in the political crisis at the end of the Weimar Republic. Although these anxieties flared when German Communists began to imitate elements of the Soviet antireligious campaigns after 1929, their roots lay in a struggle with secularist movements stretching back to the nineteenth-century "culture war" (Kulturkampf). Catholic and Protestant counter-mobilizations of 1930 to 1933 generated theologico-political concepts and calls for state intervention that fed into the mounting political crisis. The Briining government managed to curb excesses, but its inability to completely halt anticlericalism allowed nationalist opponents to capitalize on the new Kulturkampf. The article concludes by demonstrating how the NSDAP managed to portray itself as a non-confessional champion of Christian interests.
When asked to provide his own "solution to the Jewish Question" for a 1907 survey, the journalist and philosopher Fritz Mauthner responded, "I do not know how to give an answer to your question, because I do not know which Jewish question you mean. The Jewish question is posed differently by every questioner, differently at every time, differently at every location." While untypical for its time, Mauthner's viewpoint is shared by many scholars who write today—not one but a myriad of "Jewish Questions" proliferated in nineteenth-century Germany and, indeed, across the globe. The dramas they framed could be transposed onto many stages, because talk about the purported virtues and vices of Jews had the remarkable ability to latch onto and thereby produce meaning for a wide range of public debates. By plumbing this excess of meaning, scholars have teased out some of the key dynamics and antinomies of modern political thought. No longer focusing solely on conservative antisemitism, they have examined the role of the "Jewish Question" in other political movements, such as liberalism and socialism, and in the conceptual elaboration of the state, civil society, and the nation. Cast in ambivalent roles at once powerful and vulnerable, familiar and foreign, the figure of the Jew acted as a lightning rod for imagining such collectivities. Opposing parties shared common assumptions, such as the tacit understanding that integration into the nation, state, or civil society required a self-transformation of Jews, something historians have referred to as the "emancipation contract." Generally speaking, it was the terms of this contract rather than its form that divided liberals from conservatives, philo- from antisemites, and Jews from non-Jews in the nineteenth-century. Accordingly, scholars now increasingly approach the "Jewish Question" not merely as an example of prejudice, but rather as a framework through which multiple parties elaborated their positions.