Jump to content

Talk:Germanenorden

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled

[edit]

"Some say that the Deutsche Arbeiter-Partei (later the Nazi Party) when under the leadership of Adolf Hitler was a political front..." Would that be Dr. Alberich Some or Dr. Ernst Some? Wetman 02:30, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I don't understand the last sentence, it's not entirely clear, therefore I marked the article for cleanup. Kapil 03:41, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)


" This group lead to the Deutsche Arbeiter-Partei (DAP) and ultimately the NSDAP or Nazi party." I don't think this is correct; some of the later NSDAP-leaders were members of the Thule-group, but I don't think the group was in any way connected with the DAP.

Purpose of a separate article?

[edit]

The point, and usefulness, of the Ariosophy article is that it conveniently brings together all these minor and defunct Germanic mystical groups in a single place, since they are (1) closely interrelated and (2) mostly of little consequence, and that goes also for the Germanenorden in its original incarnation. I accept that there are good historical reasons for maintaining a separate article for the Thule Society on account of its (still somewhat tenuous) NSDAP connection, and one for the Armanen-Orden (an ongoing Heathen organisation whose article contains much additional information). However, this one would appear to have no good raison d'etre as it is barely more than replication of text from the Ariosophy article. Is there an intention to significantly expand it? If not, I propose simply reverting the page to a redirect. Gnostrat (talk) 00:10, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think it should be a separate article and could uses expansion. I don't know how you say the Thule Society has a tenuous connection to the NSDAP. It spawned many of the top Nazis and althouth the two have divergences in ideology there is descendency in symbolism. Mamalujo (talk) 16:20, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Not "many of the top Nazis" - just two, as far as we know for certain. The TS did no more than catalyse the formation of a workers' group which evolved into the DAP, most of whose members probably knew nothing at all about the TS. But that's an argument for another page. Best of luck expanding this one, if you reckon you can find the sources. :) Gnostrat (talk) 20:57, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"In fact, the DAP had a number of close links with the Thule Society. Hitler also had intimate ties with Thule members" -Hitler and Nazi Germany: a history p35, "The founding of the DAP took place in January 1919 on the initiative of the Munich branch of the Thule Society" -The rise and fall of Weimar democracy p156, "Both the DSP and NSDAP had their roots in the Thule Society and the Germanic Order" -The Development of the SA in Nurnberg, 1922-1934 p17, and Ian Kershaw in Hitler 1896-1936: hubris at p138-139 says the TS "membership list...reads like a Who's Who of early Nazi sympathizers and leading figures in Munich". I know this is a matter of some scholarly dispute, but many top scholars assert that the connection was far from tenuous. That alone is enough reason for a separate article. And yes it does need expanding. Mamalujo (talk) 00:04, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The DAP is not the NSDAP. When Hitler took over the party, the original founders were marginalised. Few historians have studied these 'Aryan' circles, clubs and lodges to the depth of Nicholas Goodrick-Clarke: "[Hitler] was interested in a mass political party and impatient with the small conspiratory nature of the group. In December [1919] he drafted regulations for the committee giving it full authority and preventing any 'side government' by a 'circle or lodge'. This was aimed at Harrer [the Thulist founder of the original workers' circle], who bowed out of office in January 1920. The contemptuous attack of Hitler on 'völkisch wandering scholars' in Mein Kampf presumably echoes his quarrel with Harrer and the conspiratory lodge approach of groups like the Thule Society and the Germanenorden..." (The Occult Roots of Nazism, pp. 150-151). Drexler, the first chairman, also left the party. And the party programme was in any case adapted from the already-existing Austrian national-socialist party, not handed down from the TS.
Nobody is disputing your sources when they state that the TS had a hand in founding the DAP. The question is, how much survived through the historical process leading from the TS through the workers' ring to the DAP to the NSDAP under Hitler. Answer: very little. Hitler's "close links with Thule members" were actually with men like Eckart, Feder and Rosenberg (the latter also eventually marginalised: Hitler had little room for guardians of ideological purity when national-socialism was to be whatever he wished it to be). These had been guests of the Thule Society but never members.
I don't know which membership list Kershaw is referring to, but Goodrick-Clarke studied the actual lists (as distinct from pseudo-historical fantasy lists like Dietrich Bronder's) and neither Eckart nor Feder nor Rosenberg, nor Göring nor Himmler nor Haushofer appear there as members. G-C will only acknowledge Hess and Frank, but neither of the latter would have maintained their Thule links, as the TS soon became defunct. Otherwise, there would have been no point in Sebottendorff returning to Germany in 1933 intending to revive it.
In any case, we're talking about the Germanenorden here. The TS developed out of one branch of the GO after a schism. The original GO was a shambolic affair, riven with infighting and ineffectual for anything except the odd assassination. As well as being one step even further removed from the NSDAP than the TS was. I'm sure the Germanenorden section in the Ariosophy article can be expanded a bit if you want to include all the details of who fell out with whom and why. But the fact that an offshoot grew into the Thule Society (which already has an article) doesn't make the GO noteworthy enough in itself to warrant an article of its own IMO.
Nevertheless, if you think you can do something with it, fine. All I'm saying is that, for all that's worth adding to it, the effort might be better spent expanding the GO section in Ariosophy. Gnostrat (talk) 22:48, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Germanenorden. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:56, 15 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 10:22, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Germanenorden&oldid=1207403661"