**Author:** [[3. Resources/Authors/Eric A. Johnson, Karl-Heinz Reuband|Eric A. Johnson, Karl-Heinz Reuband]] # What We Knew: Terror, Mass Murder, and Everyday Life in Nazi Germany > An Oral History of the World War II Generation ![[What We Knew Visual.excalidraw]] ## Book Overview ### About the Authors **Eric A. Johnson** is an American historian specializing in modern German and Nazi society. He has worked extensively with Gestapo and police records, court documents, and other archival materials from the Third Reich. **Karl-Heinz Reuband** is a German sociologist specializing in public opinion and survey research methodology. He is based at the University of Düsseldorf. Their decade-long collaboration combined historical expertise with rigorous social science methodology, producing what they describe as the first systematic study asking a large cross-section of the German population—both Jewish and non-Jewish—about their everyday lives, experiences with terror, and knowledge of mass murder during the Nazi period. ### Central Thesis The book challenges the prevailing "totalitarian school" conception of Nazi Germany as a society uniformly blanketed by fear and terror. Based on surveys of over 3,000 people and nearly 200 in-depth interviews, the authors demonstrate that there were effectively **two Nazi Germanys**: one experienced by most non-Jewish Germans, who largely supported the regime, led relatively normal lives, and seldom feared arrest; and another experienced by Jews and targeted minorities, who faced escalating persecution, terror, and ultimately mass murder. The book's most controversial finding concerns the question in its title: a substantial portion of the German population—between one-third and one-half of adults—knew or suspected that mass murder of Jews was occurring while it was happening. The claim that Germans "didn't know" was more excuse than reality. ### Why It Matters This study arrived during a period of intense scholarly debate about German complicity in the Holocaust, following Daniel Goldhagen's controversial *Hitler's Willing Executioners* (1996). By systematically surveying both survivors and perpetrator-generation Germans, Johnson and Reuband provide empirical grounding for what had been largely theoretical or anecdotal claims. Their methodology—combining oral history with survey research—offers a model for studying dictatorships more generally and challenges assumptions about how authoritarian regimes function. --- ## Structure of the Book The book is organized into four parts: **Part One: Jewish Survivors' Testimonies** (Chapters 1-4) - Jews who left Germany before Kristallnacht - Jews who left after Kristallnacht - Jews who were deported during the war - Jews who went into hiding **Part Two: Non-Jewish Germans' Testimonies** (Chapters 5-7) - Everyday life and knowing little about mass murder - Everyday life and hearing about mass murder - Witnessing and participating in mass murder **Part Three: Analysis of Jewish Experiences** (Chapters 8-10) - Everyday life and anti-Semitism - Terror - Mass murder **Part Four: Analysis of Non-Jewish German Experiences** (Chapters 11-13) - Everyday life and support for National Socialism - Terror - Mass murder --- ## Chapter Summaries ### Introduction The authors open with a striking juxtaposition: Adam Grolsch, a German radio operator who personally witnessed the shooting of thousands of Jews from the Pinsk ghetto in October 1942, and Herbert Klein, a Jewish survivor from Nuremberg. Both were haunted by painful memories decades later. The introduction establishes the book's central questions: Did most Germans support Hitler? How much terror did they experience? Did Jews and non-Jews have similar experiences? How widespread was anti-Semitism? And crucially—how much did ordinary Germans know about the Holocaust while it was happening? The authors position their work against the Cold War-era "totalitarian school" (Hannah Arendt, Zbigniew Brzezinski) that emphasized omnipotent secret police and pervasive fear. Recent scholarship based on archival research has begun to stress complicity and consent over coercion. The survey and interview evidence presented here supports this newer understanding. ### Part One: Jewish Survivors' Testimonies **Chapter 1: Jews Who Left Germany Before Kristallnacht** These testimonies come from Jews who emigrated between 1933-1938, before the worst violence. William Benson of Leipzig recalls watching Hitler speak and seeing Germans with tears streaming down their faces, hypnotized by his rhetoric. Many Jewish families initially believed the Nazi regime would be temporary or that their status as patriotic Germans would protect them. The testimonies reveal a range of experiences with anti-Semitism—some experienced it intensely in schools and neighborhoods, while others, particularly in cities like Cologne, reported relatively little hostility. **Chapter 2: Jews Who Left After Kristallnacht** The November 1938 pogrom was a turning point. Armin Hertz describes the aftermath in Berlin: the boycotts, the graffiti, neighbors chasing away customers. His toes were frozen during imprisonment and later fell off. These testimonies document the transition from legal discrimination to open violence, and the realization for many Jews that emigration was now a matter of survival rather than choice. **Chapter 3: Jews Who Were Deported During the War** Max Liffman describes the October 1940 deportation of 6,548 Jews from Baden and the Palatinate to the Gurs concentration camp in France. At that point, the Nazis were still discussing Madagascar as a destination. Herbert Klein of Nuremberg details the progressive restrictions: banned from movies, swimming pools, parks. Rosa Hirsch describes the yellow star and the strange effect it had—some Germans crossed the street to avoid her, while others secretly showed sympathy. The most harrowing testimonies concern the deportations themselves and survival in the camps. **Chapter 4: Jews Who Went Into Hiding** These rare testimonies describe the extreme measures some Jews took to survive—hiding with sympathetic Germans or living under false identities. One woman survived by jumping from a train headed to Auschwitz. These accounts also reveal the minority of Germans who risked their lives to help Jews, though the testimony makes clear this minority was tragically small. ### Part Two: Non-Jewish Germans' Testimonies **Chapter 5: Everyday Life and Knowing Little About Mass Murder** Hubert Lutz, son of a Nazi Party functionary in Cologne, describes the Hitler Youth experience as exciting and normal. He explicitly denies that the organization encouraged spying on parents. These testimonies reveal how non-Jewish Germans often experienced the Third Reich as a period of prosperity, purpose, and national renewal after the chaos of Weimar. Most claim to have known little or nothing about mass murder during the war. **Chapter 6: Everyday Life and Hearing About Mass Murder** Hiltrud Kühnel of Frankfurt describes her dentistry studies at university, where her anatomy professor openly discussed his research on skulls of Jews killed in concentration camps. She also heard about gassing from Catholic clergymen who visited her family's home. These testimonies document the various channels through which information about the Holocaust reached ordinary Germans—soldiers on leave, BBC broadcasts, church networks, and personal connections. **Chapter 7: Witnessing and Participating in Mass Murder** Adam Grolsch, a radio operator on the eastern front, provides detailed testimony of witnessing the murder of 25,000 Jews from the Pinsk ghetto over two days in October 1942. He regularly listened to BBC broadcasts during the war, which confirmed and supplemented what he witnessed. These testimonies from soldiers and others who saw mass murder firsthand are among the most difficult to read, but they document that many Germans had direct knowledge of what was happening. ### Part Three: Analysis of Jewish Experiences **Chapter 8: Everyday Life and Anti-Semitism** The survey data shows that most Jews enjoyed cordial relations with non-Jews before 1933—only 3% rated treatment as unfriendly before Hitler, but this dropped to 6% rating treatment as friendly by 1939. The evidence qualifies Goldhagen's thesis of deep-seated "eliminationist anti-Semitism" while still showing that anti-Semitism became increasingly virulent after 1933. Many Jews had been proud, patriotic Germans who felt deeply betrayed. About one-third of survivors mentioned fathers or uncles who had been decorated German soldiers in World War I. **Chapter 9: Terror** The data starkly demonstrates the selective application of terror. Nearly half of Jewish survivors who remained in Germany after 1941 reported living in constant fear of arrest. Only about 5% of non-Jewish respondents reported such fear. Jews and non-Jews violated Nazi laws at similar rates (about two-thirds of both groups), but Jews faced severe punishment while non-Jews were typically ignored. Only about 1% of non-Jewish respondents had ever been arrested or summoned by the Gestapo; nearly all Jews who remained in Germany were eventually incarcerated. **Chapter 10: Mass Murder** By late 1942 or early 1943, most Jews still in Germany knew mass murder was occurring. Information came from multiple sources. The testimony of Helmut Grunewald is striking: during Gestapo interrogation in December 1942, his father blurted out, "I know that I'll be sent to Auschwitz and be gassed anyway." Many Jews learned only when they themselves were deported; others had received information earlier but, as Hannelore Mahler explained, "didn't want to believe it, because we could have been next." ### Part Four: Analysis of Non-Jewish German Experiences **Chapter 11: Everyday Life and Support for National Socialism** The survey data shows that the majority of non-Jewish respondents shared at least some Nazi ideals and believed in National Socialism. Only in Catholic Cologne did opponents narrowly outnumber supporters. Support was higher among Protestants, higher-educated individuals, and those from eastern Germany. However, views of Hitler himself were more often negative than positive, perhaps because endorsing Hitler would seem to endorse anti-Semitism. Only 4% selected "the Jews were no longer so powerful" from a list of things they liked about National Socialism. **Chapter 12: Terror** The Gestapo was far more limited in resources than commonly assumed. In many small towns, political police work was handled by one or two regular officers. Terror was applied selectively—ruthlessly against Jews and targeted enemies, leniently toward the general population. Upwards of 70% of non-Jewish respondents didn't know anyone personally who had been charged with an unlawful act. Most Germans understood intuitively that the terror apparatus wasn't aimed at them. **Chapter 13: Mass Murder** The authors present their differing interpretations of what percentage of Germans knew about the Holocaust. Reuband estimates about one-third; Johnson argues for closer to one-half of adults. The difference hinges on how to categorize those who said they "suspected" rather than "knew" or "heard," how to weight for age (younger respondents knew less), and how to account for non-response to sensitive questions. Regardless of which estimate one accepts, the implications are significant: millions of Germans knew or suspected mass murder was occurring while it was happening. Information spread through multiple channels—soldiers returning from the east, BBC broadcasts, church networks, and word of mouth. The postwar refrain "we didn't know" was largely a convenient fiction. ### Conclusion: What Did They Know? The authors emphasize the "two truths" of Nazi Germany: it was both happy for Nazis and supporters and miserable for Jews and opponents. Most non-Jewish Germans led normal, even happy lives. Few feared arrest despite frequently breaking minor laws. Most supported the regime, though not necessarily its anti-Semitic policies. And a substantial minority—at minimum one-third, possibly half or more—knew or suspected that mass murder was occurring. The implications extend beyond Nazi Germany to how we understand dictatorships generally. The totalitarian model of pervasive fear and oppression may obscure a more troubling reality: dictatorships can be popular among the majority even while committing atrocities against minorities. --- ## Key Themes ### The Two Nazi Germanys The book's central insight is that Nazi Germany was experienced radically differently depending on whether one was a target of persecution. For most Germans, it was a time of prosperity, national renewal, and relative freedom from state interference. For Jews and other targeted groups, it was a nightmare of escalating persecution culminating in genocide. ### Selective Terror The Gestapo was not omnipotent or omnipresent. It was a relatively small organization that relied heavily on civilian informers and concentrated its resources on targeted enemies. Most Germans could violate laws with impunity so long as they broadly accepted the regime. This challenges the notion that Nazi Germany was held together primarily by fear. ### Complicity vs. Coercion The evidence strongly supports the newer scholarly consensus that Nazi Germany functioned more through consent than coercion for the majority population. Most Germans didn't need to be forced to support the regime—they did so willingly, at least in its broad outlines, though not necessarily in all its specific policies. ### The Knowledge Question The book's most consequential finding is that knowledge of the Holocaust was widespread during the war. The postwar claim "we didn't know" appears to have been more excuse than reality. Information was available through multiple channels for those willing to receive it. --- ## The Two Nazi Societies at a Glance | | Non-Jewish Germans | Jews | |---|---|---| | **Daily Experience** | Relative normalcy, employment, national pride | Escalating persecution, exclusion, fear | | **Fear of Arrest** | ~5% constant fear, ~75% no fear | ~50% constant fear, ~75% after 1941 | | **Experience of Terror** | Rare unless politically targeted | Constant and intensifying | | **Support for Regime** | Majority supported at least some aspects | Victims of the regime | | **Knowledge of Holocaust** | 1/3 to 1/2 knew during the war | Most knew by late 1942 | | **Source of Information** | Soldiers on leave, BBC, rumors | Direct experience, deportations, grapevine | --- ## Analytical Reading ### Main Arguments 1. The "totalitarian" model of Nazi Germany as uniformly oppressive is inaccurate—terror was applied selectively 2. Most non-Jewish Germans supported the regime and experienced it positively 3. Jews and non-Jews had fundamentally different experiences of the same historical period 4. Anti-Semitism was not necessarily deep-seated before 1933 but became increasingly virulent thereafter 5. Between one-third and one-half of adult Germans knew or suspected mass murder was occurring during the war 6. Dictatorships can be popular among majorities while committing atrocities against minorities ### Methodology The authors combine: - Written surveys of 3,000+ people in Cologne, Krefeld, Dresden, Berlin, and among Jewish survivors worldwide - Nearly 200 in-depth face-to-face interviews - Careful attention to sample representativeness and response rates - Multiple interviewers to control for interviewer effects - Comparison between Jewish and non-Jewish experiences using parallel questions The methodology is transparently presented, including honest acknowledgment of limitations and the authors' disagreement about interpretation of the knowledge question. ### Strengths - Massive empirical foundation (largest systematic survey of its kind) - Both Jewish and non-Jewish perspectives compared directly - Rigorous social science methodology combined with rich oral history - Honest about limitations and internal disagreements - Challenges received wisdom from multiple directions (neither apologetic nor simply condemnatory) ### Limitations - Sample necessarily younger than the adult population of Nazi Germany (survivors) - Self-reporting decades after events raises memory and bias concerns - Cannot interview the dead—no voice from those who didn't survive - Some questions (especially about knowledge) may be subject to socially desirable responding --- ## Key Statistics from the Surveys **Jewish Survivor Survey**: - 69% rated family treatment by non-Jews as "friendly or mostly friendly" before 1933 - Only 6% rated treatment as friendly by the time war broke out (1939) - 73% of Jews remaining in Germany after 1941 lived in constant fear of arrest - 64% had heard about mass murder in concentration camps before war's end - 31% who were eventually deported knew about mass murder before deportation **Non-Jewish German Survey**: - Majority believed in National Socialism and shared at least some Nazi ideals - Only about 5% reported living in constant fear of arrest - ~75% reported no fear of arrest whatsoever - Only 1% had ever been arrested or summoned by Gestapo - ~70% didn't personally know anyone charged with an unlawful act - 28-50% (depending on estimate) knew or suspected mass murder during the war --- ## Personal Reflection ### Key Takeaways 1. **Dictatorship functions through consent more than we assume**: The finding that most Germans led happy, normal lives challenges comfortable notions about how totalitarianism works. Oppression need not be universal to be effective. 2. **"We didn't know" was largely false**: The evidence that knowledge was widespread has implications for how we think about moral responsibility. Ignorance was often willful rather than enforced. 3. **Terror is surgical, not blanket**: The Gestapo's selective application of terror was strategically brilliant—it intimidated targets while leaving most citizens feeling free. This is more dangerous than omnipresent surveillance. 4. **Identity determines experience**: The same historical period was paradise for some and hell for others, depending entirely on how the regime categorized them. This speaks to how systematically unjust systems function. 5. **Surveys can access what archives can't**: The combination of oral history with survey methodology provides a model for studying experiences that leave few documentary traces. ### Questions Raised - How do we apply these findings to understanding contemporary authoritarian regimes? - What responsibility do majorities bear when they benefit from regimes that oppress minorities? - How does willful ignorance differ morally from genuine lack of knowledge? - Could something similar happen again, and would we recognize it? ### Connections to Other Works - Hannah Arendt's *The Origins of Totalitarianism* and *Eichmann in Jerusalem*—this study challenges and complicates her model - Daniel Goldhagen's *Hitler's Willing Executioners*—the evidence qualifies his extreme claims about German anti-Semitism while supporting his broader point about complicity - Ian Kershaw's Hitler biographies—the authors cite his work extensively and share his emphasis on consent - Victor Klemperer's diaries *I Will Bear Witness*—provides individual-level corroboration of the survey findings - Stanley Milgram's obedience studies—the structural conditions that enable ordinary people to participate in or ignore atrocity - [[It Didn't Start with You]]—intergenerational trauma from Holocaust experiences --- ## Action Items - [ ] Read Hannah Arendt's *Eichmann in Jerusalem* for comparison on "banality of evil" - [ ] Explore Victor Klemperer's diaries for individual-level account - [ ] Consider implications for understanding contemporary authoritarian movements - [ ] Reflect on distinction between active support, passive complicity, and resistance - [ ] Research what became of the witnesses—did any face consequences for what they knew?