Discussion - Member to Member Sales - Research Center
Discussion - Member to Member Sales - Research Center
We tend to assume that in totalitarian states every aspect of life is masterminded and controlled by evil geniuses - in the present case that every Third Reich stamp issue was a deliberately-planned propagandist ploy conceived and carried out by, perhaps, Goebbels. Yet I have never known any philatelic source to provide hard evidence that postage stamps were of any concern to the Reichsminister whatever. He certainly seems to have had little regard for the man who was actually in charge of the post - Wilhelm Ohnesorge. If there was any plan, it was Ohnesorge's. Let's see what we can determine from the stamps themselves.
For my database I have included all Third Reich stamps with the exception of Officials, parcel post, fieldpost, and any duplicates based solely on differences of watermark or perforation, or appearance on a souvenir sheet. That gives me a total of 404 stamps which could in theory at least have been used by Germans to send letters - that is to say, stamps in public circulation whose design or secondary purpose conveyed some meaning to those who saw them.
Which of these had to do with the political and military history of the Third Reich, and which appear to be 'soft' propaganda, or indeed no propaganda at all? Isolate the former, and we might be able to chart the rise and fall of the Reich.
I reckon that 52 issues out of 130 (40%), and 151 stamps out of 404 (37%) are 'political' or 'military' and thus intentionally propagandist. 44 stamps (11%) feature the swastika either as a major part of the design, or incidentally (the last of these in January 1944).
Issues began conservatively in 1933 but took off the following year, with four consecutive releases from January to August directly referencing past or current NSDAP concerns, and continued into 1935, with six out of the eleven sets directly propagandist.
Politico-military stamps, two each from 1934 and 1935. The second stamp shows Karl Peters, a particularly nasty individual once i/c German East Africa, duly disgraced and dismissed. Hitler rehabilitated him in 1938.
1936 was, of course, special, Berlin having been chosen for the Olympics long before Hitler's time. We should not be surprised, then, that only the annual NSDAP Nuremburg Congress stamps overtly championed the regime - otherwise there were trains, planes, airships, two "international" Congresses and the beginning of the horse obsession. Visitors to Germany that year need not have been put off by blatant Nazi imagery.
The Berlin Olympics was a hugely propagandist event, but the image on this stamp is entirely neutral.
1937 saw the retirement, if such it was, of Reichspostminister Paul Freiherr von Eltz-Rubenach, his position taken over by Ohnesorge (who had already been State Secretary since 1929 and thus effectively in charge). That seemed to make a difference in stamp issues, the eventually-abandoned policy of souvenir sheets dominating the lowest annual output of stamps in the entire period (1945 obviously excepted). Thereafter the issuing policy reverted, a steady percentage of all stamps propagandist in nature.
There was something of a spike in 1943, as news of the debacle at Stalingrad filtered through. The Third Reich anniversaries began, the first Armed Forces and Heroes set of 12 appeared, and Hitler's birthday warranted six stamps rather than the usual single. The Munich Putsch of 1923 was recalled, as it would be the following year. Even the one-off stamp for philatelists featured the Reichsadler, with swastika, oak leaves and eagle.
For philatelists only - yet a direct appeal from the Party; dramatic imagery to attract young German lads everywhere; the final 1943 stamp, with its somewhat plaintive claim "And yet you still won".
1944 saw the final swastika stamp, and it's tempting to think that overt propaganda was being wound down for fear of irritating an increasingly beleaguered populace. The desperate 1945 issues may have shown fierce-looking fighters, but in the final stamp of all the limp and distant flag barely reveals its symbol.
The last swastika stamp, issued long before the war's end; the 'limp and distant flag' - what message would that have sent?
Is there a trajectory to be discerned throughout these issues? Possibly the only way to arrive at a definitive answer would be to compare those of, say, the USSR over a similar period. You may think that an average of two stamps out of every five over 12 years shows a fairly strong commitment to the glorification of the Third Reich, more or less maintained throughout, despite the 1936-7 period for which there were evident reasons. At any rate, it is a fascinating period for any collector who values the history behind the stamps as much as their technical production.
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
Thank you for posting your thoughts on this period in German history.
I would like to add some additional thoughts.
The issues of Frederick The Great and the Wagner Operas while not overtly displaying Nazi symbols such as the swastika are nevertheless potent images that fit nicely into the ongoing Nazi propaganda that assaulted the German public: Nazi philosophy, newspapers, etc. built up mythos regarding Frederick The Great (Hitler kept a famous portrait of Frederick The Great, taking it with him to the bunker) and the racial purity of the Wagner Operas.
The seemingly innocuous Hindenburg issues were issued in booklet format and vending format with Nazi slogan labels as were the Hitler head definitive issues providing space for constant reinforcement of the regime.
The four portrait stamps that represent the German Lost Colonies movement in Nazi parlance were also of propagandistic value.
The Welfare Fund issues highlighting professions had its Nazi propaganda value as well pointing Germans toward the unifying principle of the Volk through work. I would also assign the same propaganda value to the Welfare Fund costumes issue featuring women. Also the Modern Building set touts the accomplishments of the regime.
Just a few subtle ones but I think a perusal of the various Third Reich issues would give us more examples of the Nazi effort to propagandize the post.
Bruce
2 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
Hi Guthrum,
Your comments are very interesting but I disagree about the final stamp: for me the image is dominated by the SS insignia of the soldier in the foreground, a powerful symbol of the Nazi state.
Login to Like
this post
Thanks for that, Bruce, and yes, I agree with everything you say, especially the point that further overt Nazi imagery is to be found on booklets, as well as cancels or special postmarks.
However, for the purposes of argument, I feel that a line has to be drawn somewhere, otherwise virtually every stamp issue from the 3rd Reich could be argued to be propagandist. If that view is taken, then I do not think there is an argument to be had; it suffices merely to assign a propagandist value to all 400-odd stamps.
I tried to make a distinction between the image on the stamp, and the purpose of the stamp - hence the example of the left-footed footballer! There may be a distinction to be drawn between images which glorify the country, and those which glorify the NSDAP - unless the view is taken that the two were indivisible. A guiding principle might be to identify those stamps which could have been issued by any country, regardless of political slant. Among those I would include architecture, tourist promotion and cultural anniversary issues.
I have been trying to compare the stamps of Stalinist Russia with Hitler's Third Reich from the point of view of propaganda. The methods strike me as very different.
And of course there is the very British point of view (assumed - I have no hard evidence) that it was entirely beneath us as a nation to attempt anything as underhand as influencing the populace with postage stamps! (We used big posters.) I have never understood Britain's pre-Postmaster-Benn stamp-issuing policy, and can only suspect that during WW2 they simply missed a trick.
PS I have just read Nigel's comment (we posted simultaneously), which is a fair point, although I would argue that the SS flash was nowhere near as representative of the state in 1945 as the swastika flag. Erich Meerwald designed the last-but-one swastika stamp (Youth Dedication Day, March 1943) as well as the one under consideration. He must have felt that the flash, two years on, was the more powerful symbol of the two, but I doubt it resonated with the beleaguered populace as much as the swastika had done. By mid-April 1945 it may have been the case of "let the SS do what it will, as a nation we have had enough!"
I am busy reading Ian Kershaw's The End: Germany 1944-45, and will let you know in due course if he has anything to say on the matter.
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
Guthrum,
Your opening post mentioned the beginning of the horse obsession. Could you throw more light on this, as it seems rather curious?
Login to Like
this post
Extracts from my write-ups in my TR album:
"The ‘Brown Ribbon’ race was the high point of International Racing Week, an annual meet held at the Riem racecourse near Munich from 1934 to 1944. It was a 12-furlong flat race; the winner in 1936 was the mare Nereid. The Board of Trustees included Minister of Posts Wilhelm Ohnesorge, which may partly explain the series of eight Brown Ribbon stamps which appeared annually to 1944.
The International Riemer Racing Week was set up in opposition to Germany’s erstwhile most important meeting, the Baden International Grand Prix, whose aristocratic organisers neither approved of the Nazis nor met with their approval."
The Hamburg Derby furnished a stamp each year from 1939 to 1942, after which Allied bombing of the city rendered its running impossible. Meanwhile in a striking, if not horse-based, image (of the Brandenburg Gate) came a one-off commemoration:
"Berlin Grand prix 1941
The Grand Prix of Berlin was a classic race for three-year-old thoroughbreds, established in 1888, and run at the Hoppegarten track north-east of the city. In 1941 it was won by the Italian horse Niccolo dell’Arca."
...and again:
"
The Brown Ribbon of 1943 was won by Hans Zehmisch on Panzerturm.
(The Derby, no longer appearing on stamps, had been relocated to the Hoppegarten before the July bombing of Hamburg.)"
The Vienna Grand Prix, unaffected by enemy action, was commemorated in 1943 and 1944.
I challenge readers to find any more consistent and thorough a racing coverage on stamps in a comparable period!
Login to Like
this post
Thank you for the explanation. This recently bought cover may just fit in quite nicely with the detail you provided in this thread:
Iffezheim Racecourse, near Baden Baden, was established in 1858. I can find no information about its racing activities for the inter-war years.
The top set of stamps was issued on 3 June 1936 to mark the Internationaler Gemeindekongress (International Communities Congress) , München und Berlin.
The others form the set of stamps to promote Luftschutz (air raid defence), under the control of the RLB (notice the inscription on the shield). The RLB (Reichsluftschutzbund) was founded in April 1933 by the Ministry of Aviation, under Helmut Goering to train volunteer air raid wardens.
So it would seem that even as early as 1933, the Deutsches Reich were preparing their home defence against any future foreign offensive.
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
04:53:50pm
Awesome cover! Wow!!!
Login to Like
this post
Posting so Ningpo will see this topic again. I have nothing to add to the discussion.
Peter
Login to Like
this post
"And of course there is the very British point of view (assumed - I have no hard evidence) that it was entirely beneath us as a nation to attempt anything as underhand as influencing the populace with postage stamps! (We used big posters.)"
This perhaps in an example of a rather reserved British approach to 'propaganda'. No sabre rattling, no mention of 'the enemy' here. Just an attempt to build hope for the future and to address the imbalance of social classes, education and equal opportunities:
Login to Like
this post
Interesting that such socialist ideals were disseminated under Churchill's name (though I imagine he had nothing to do with this calendar). These were precisely the ideals that triggered his downfall the following July!
What we really want to know, of course, is whether it was ever suggested, at some meeting or other, that Britain should use stamps in the same way as they used posters. Or who it was that decreed (presumably with iron hand) that postage stamps were NOT to be used for any such purpose at all! The Postmasters-General at that time were William Morrison and Harry Crookshank, both Conservatives, but immediate information about both is confined to a CV which mentions their wartime role only in passing. The Ministers of Information, Duff Cooper and Brendan Bracken, may have had discussions re propaganda on stamps, but I doubt we shall easily find that out, either.
Is there something about the British 'national character' that rejects overt propaganda, as opposed to the Germans or Russians, who seem to have embraced it?
Login to Like
this post
Guthrum
I think British people of all social classes, have a healthy cynicism (and suspicion) which automatically looks for " a hidden agenda" in any promulgation from authority ( even where there isn't one!). We also tend to be embarrassed ( both for ourselves and the originator ) where there is what we deem to be over-enthusiasm or "gushing" in any sense.
This is why I think we also find it difficult to accept business practices from other countries which are "in your face". For instance the U.S. originating "mission statement", although it can be a useful tool, we find ( the term) to be pretentious and patronising.
It is often the presentation of ideas, rather than the content, which leads to resistance and ridicule. Possibly one of the biggest causes of difficulties between nations is an inability to understand the nuances which govern people's attitudes to certain situations.
While the English-speaking nations have a common origin, and broadly the same values, the interpretation of these values are often a million miles apart.
Malcolm
Login to Like
this post
"I think British people of all social classes have a healthy cynicism (and suspicion) which automatically looks for "a hidden agenda" in any promulgation from authority (even where there isn't one!). We also tend to be embarrassed (both for ourselves and the originator) where there is what we deem to be over-enthusiasm or "gushing" in any sense."
Absolutely.
But why? Where does that come from?
On another forum it is pointed out that Goebbels gained much of his propagandist understanding by studying the American sales techniques which arrived in Germany in the 1920s. (We too are pathetically in awe of American business techniques, especially when they are forced upon our own work procedures.) The pre-war German psyche has been studied extensively in an effort to understand how Hitler rose to power, but I do not know whether the British have been the subjects of similar studies. Why do we reject overt propaganda?
Login to Like
this post
"Why do we reject overt propaganda?"
That is a very tough question. Imagine that being asked in an examination paper!
What is apparent is that the British Government were quite aware of of this attitude. According to a paper written by Sheila Joglekar in 2004; in reference to the role BBC should play:
"An internal memorandum dating from the early 1940’s headed “War-time Propaganda†laid down as principles for propaganda programs, “no deliberate perversion of truth and avoidance of cheapness and personal ridicule.â€
The objection to such things was not based on grounds of morality, but simply that the public would not believe them."
So it would seem that we would have to venture further back in time, to find the answer to that very question.
Login to Like
this post
i'd venture it has much to do with the democratic process where TWO DIFFERENT points of view (or more) are aired freely and allowed to compete. There aren't that many countries with a strong, long-standing democratic process in place. It is why America succeeded in the aftermath of its independence and most other more harshly ruled countries failed.
It is also why America has such an abysmal record of transplanting democracy to places with no history of it; we just don't understand how a nation wouldn't see the innate value of the democratic give and take (although, given the state of our current politic discourse, I'm not sure how long it's gonna stick here).
Login to Like
this post
provisional cancels post 1945.5 here is refernce work ...
http://www.saechsische-schwaerzung.de/
adolf hitler was a billionaire by may 1945. royalties from mein kampf and his portraits on stamps. his sister inherited his estate.
Login to Like
this post
What point are you trying to make here, phos45?
It is well-known that Hitler was very rich, not least because of income from 'Hitler's Culture Fund' used to pay for his art collection.
Who is this 'sister' of whom you speak? I understand some relatives attempted after the war to get their hands on his money, without success.
"After the war, Hitler's property and assets, including a house in Munich he had built for Eva Braun, were given to the state of Bavaria by the Allied Control Commission. He had no children."
That from a newspaper feature a while back, at http://www.nytimes.com/2002/08/08/world/hitler-it-seems-loved-money-and-died-rich.html
And here is an extract from another internet article:
"Hitler earned additional tens of millions of dollars licensing his image to the state for a variety of political purposes. During his reign, Hitler allowed his image to be used on German stamps and posters that pushed the Nazi propaganda machine. He did not, however, hand over his image for free. While technically German photographer Heinrich Hoffmann owned the rights to Hitler's official state portraits, most historians agree that Hoffman was likely a puppet to true beneficiary, the Fuhrer himself. As with his Mein Kampf rights, the rights to his image are now controlled by the state of Bavaria and any profits earned are distributed to charity.
During his time as an artist in Vienna, Hitler produced hundreds of paintings. Many of these were seized by The US government after WWII and will never see the light of day. Periodically however, a few of his paintings will come up for auction and fetch tens of thousands of dollars for a private seller. As with his book royalties, Hitler's distant heirs would have a legitimate claim to those profits but so far all have refused."
...which can be found at http://www.celebritynetworth.com/articles/celebrity/rich-hitler/
I tend to use Kershaw as the ultimate authority on Hitler, but do not have his work to hand at the moment.
Login to Like
this post
Any study of the Third Reich through its philately would have to incorporate not only the postage stamps it issued for twelve years, but much else besides: a significant amount of postal stationery, special postmarks and (as I pointed out in an earlier thread) the many propagandist postcards that form a parallel hobby to stamp-collecting. Such a study might go either of two ways - it might chart the familiar rise and fall of the Third Reich that we already know from the history books (which was the question originally raised); or it might show that the world of stamp production, distribution, sale and use (not to speak of collection) existed on a different orbit altogether and was only occasionally touched by the mighty political and military events dominating Europe.
We tend to assume that in totalitarian states every aspect of life is masterminded and controlled by evil geniuses - in the present case that every Third Reich stamp issue was a deliberately-planned propagandist ploy conceived and carried out by, perhaps, Goebbels. Yet I have never known any philatelic source to provide hard evidence that postage stamps were of any concern to the Reichsminister whatever. He certainly seems to have had little regard for the man who was actually in charge of the post - Wilhelm Ohnesorge. If there was any plan, it was Ohnesorge's. Let's see what we can determine from the stamps themselves.
For my database I have included all Third Reich stamps with the exception of Officials, parcel post, fieldpost, and any duplicates based solely on differences of watermark or perforation, or appearance on a souvenir sheet. That gives me a total of 404 stamps which could in theory at least have been used by Germans to send letters - that is to say, stamps in public circulation whose design or secondary purpose conveyed some meaning to those who saw them.
Which of these had to do with the political and military history of the Third Reich, and which appear to be 'soft' propaganda, or indeed no propaganda at all? Isolate the former, and we might be able to chart the rise and fall of the Reich.
I reckon that 52 issues out of 130 (40%), and 151 stamps out of 404 (37%) are 'political' or 'military' and thus intentionally propagandist. 44 stamps (11%) feature the swastika either as a major part of the design, or incidentally (the last of these in January 1944).
Issues began conservatively in 1933 but took off the following year, with four consecutive releases from January to August directly referencing past or current NSDAP concerns, and continued into 1935, with six out of the eleven sets directly propagandist.
Politico-military stamps, two each from 1934 and 1935. The second stamp shows Karl Peters, a particularly nasty individual once i/c German East Africa, duly disgraced and dismissed. Hitler rehabilitated him in 1938.
1936 was, of course, special, Berlin having been chosen for the Olympics long before Hitler's time. We should not be surprised, then, that only the annual NSDAP Nuremburg Congress stamps overtly championed the regime - otherwise there were trains, planes, airships, two "international" Congresses and the beginning of the horse obsession. Visitors to Germany that year need not have been put off by blatant Nazi imagery.
The Berlin Olympics was a hugely propagandist event, but the image on this stamp is entirely neutral.
1937 saw the retirement, if such it was, of Reichspostminister Paul Freiherr von Eltz-Rubenach, his position taken over by Ohnesorge (who had already been State Secretary since 1929 and thus effectively in charge). That seemed to make a difference in stamp issues, the eventually-abandoned policy of souvenir sheets dominating the lowest annual output of stamps in the entire period (1945 obviously excepted). Thereafter the issuing policy reverted, a steady percentage of all stamps propagandist in nature.
There was something of a spike in 1943, as news of the debacle at Stalingrad filtered through. The Third Reich anniversaries began, the first Armed Forces and Heroes set of 12 appeared, and Hitler's birthday warranted six stamps rather than the usual single. The Munich Putsch of 1923 was recalled, as it would be the following year. Even the one-off stamp for philatelists featured the Reichsadler, with swastika, oak leaves and eagle.
For philatelists only - yet a direct appeal from the Party; dramatic imagery to attract young German lads everywhere; the final 1943 stamp, with its somewhat plaintive claim "And yet you still won".
1944 saw the final swastika stamp, and it's tempting to think that overt propaganda was being wound down for fear of irritating an increasingly beleaguered populace. The desperate 1945 issues may have shown fierce-looking fighters, but in the final stamp of all the limp and distant flag barely reveals its symbol.
The last swastika stamp, issued long before the war's end; the 'limp and distant flag' - what message would that have sent?
Is there a trajectory to be discerned throughout these issues? Possibly the only way to arrive at a definitive answer would be to compare those of, say, the USSR over a similar period. You may think that an average of two stamps out of every five over 12 years shows a fairly strong commitment to the glorification of the Third Reich, more or less maintained throughout, despite the 1936-7 period for which there were evident reasons. At any rate, it is a fascinating period for any collector who values the history behind the stamps as much as their technical production.
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
05:13:41pm
re: Third Reich stamps - some facts and figures
Thank you for posting your thoughts on this period in German history.
I would like to add some additional thoughts.
The issues of Frederick The Great and the Wagner Operas while not overtly displaying Nazi symbols such as the swastika are nevertheless potent images that fit nicely into the ongoing Nazi propaganda that assaulted the German public: Nazi philosophy, newspapers, etc. built up mythos regarding Frederick The Great (Hitler kept a famous portrait of Frederick The Great, taking it with him to the bunker) and the racial purity of the Wagner Operas.
The seemingly innocuous Hindenburg issues were issued in booklet format and vending format with Nazi slogan labels as were the Hitler head definitive issues providing space for constant reinforcement of the regime.
The four portrait stamps that represent the German Lost Colonies movement in Nazi parlance were also of propagandistic value.
The Welfare Fund issues highlighting professions had its Nazi propaganda value as well pointing Germans toward the unifying principle of the Volk through work. I would also assign the same propaganda value to the Welfare Fund costumes issue featuring women. Also the Modern Building set touts the accomplishments of the regime.
Just a few subtle ones but I think a perusal of the various Third Reich issues would give us more examples of the Nazi effort to propagandize the post.
Bruce
2 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
re: Third Reich stamps - some facts and figures
Hi Guthrum,
Your comments are very interesting but I disagree about the final stamp: for me the image is dominated by the SS insignia of the soldier in the foreground, a powerful symbol of the Nazi state.
Login to Like
this post
re: Third Reich stamps - some facts and figures
Thanks for that, Bruce, and yes, I agree with everything you say, especially the point that further overt Nazi imagery is to be found on booklets, as well as cancels or special postmarks.
However, for the purposes of argument, I feel that a line has to be drawn somewhere, otherwise virtually every stamp issue from the 3rd Reich could be argued to be propagandist. If that view is taken, then I do not think there is an argument to be had; it suffices merely to assign a propagandist value to all 400-odd stamps.
I tried to make a distinction between the image on the stamp, and the purpose of the stamp - hence the example of the left-footed footballer! There may be a distinction to be drawn between images which glorify the country, and those which glorify the NSDAP - unless the view is taken that the two were indivisible. A guiding principle might be to identify those stamps which could have been issued by any country, regardless of political slant. Among those I would include architecture, tourist promotion and cultural anniversary issues.
I have been trying to compare the stamps of Stalinist Russia with Hitler's Third Reich from the point of view of propaganda. The methods strike me as very different.
And of course there is the very British point of view (assumed - I have no hard evidence) that it was entirely beneath us as a nation to attempt anything as underhand as influencing the populace with postage stamps! (We used big posters.) I have never understood Britain's pre-Postmaster-Benn stamp-issuing policy, and can only suspect that during WW2 they simply missed a trick.
PS I have just read Nigel's comment (we posted simultaneously), which is a fair point, although I would argue that the SS flash was nowhere near as representative of the state in 1945 as the swastika flag. Erich Meerwald designed the last-but-one swastika stamp (Youth Dedication Day, March 1943) as well as the one under consideration. He must have felt that the flash, two years on, was the more powerful symbol of the two, but I doubt it resonated with the beleaguered populace as much as the swastika had done. By mid-April 1945 it may have been the case of "let the SS do what it will, as a nation we have had enough!"
I am busy reading Ian Kershaw's The End: Germany 1944-45, and will let you know in due course if he has anything to say on the matter.
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
re: Third Reich stamps - some facts and figures
Guthrum,
Your opening post mentioned the beginning of the horse obsession. Could you throw more light on this, as it seems rather curious?
Login to Like
this post
re: Third Reich stamps - some facts and figures
Extracts from my write-ups in my TR album:
"The ‘Brown Ribbon’ race was the high point of International Racing Week, an annual meet held at the Riem racecourse near Munich from 1934 to 1944. It was a 12-furlong flat race; the winner in 1936 was the mare Nereid. The Board of Trustees included Minister of Posts Wilhelm Ohnesorge, which may partly explain the series of eight Brown Ribbon stamps which appeared annually to 1944.
The International Riemer Racing Week was set up in opposition to Germany’s erstwhile most important meeting, the Baden International Grand Prix, whose aristocratic organisers neither approved of the Nazis nor met with their approval."
The Hamburg Derby furnished a stamp each year from 1939 to 1942, after which Allied bombing of the city rendered its running impossible. Meanwhile in a striking, if not horse-based, image (of the Brandenburg Gate) came a one-off commemoration:
"Berlin Grand prix 1941
The Grand Prix of Berlin was a classic race for three-year-old thoroughbreds, established in 1888, and run at the Hoppegarten track north-east of the city. In 1941 it was won by the Italian horse Niccolo dell’Arca."
...and again:
"
The Brown Ribbon of 1943 was won by Hans Zehmisch on Panzerturm.
(The Derby, no longer appearing on stamps, had been relocated to the Hoppegarten before the July bombing of Hamburg.)"
The Vienna Grand Prix, unaffected by enemy action, was commemorated in 1943 and 1944.
I challenge readers to find any more consistent and thorough a racing coverage on stamps in a comparable period!
Login to Like
this post
re: Third Reich stamps - some facts and figures
Thank you for the explanation. This recently bought cover may just fit in quite nicely with the detail you provided in this thread:
Iffezheim Racecourse, near Baden Baden, was established in 1858. I can find no information about its racing activities for the inter-war years.
The top set of stamps was issued on 3 June 1936 to mark the Internationaler Gemeindekongress (International Communities Congress) , München und Berlin.
The others form the set of stamps to promote Luftschutz (air raid defence), under the control of the RLB (notice the inscription on the shield). The RLB (Reichsluftschutzbund) was founded in April 1933 by the Ministry of Aviation, under Helmut Goering to train volunteer air raid wardens.
So it would seem that even as early as 1933, the Deutsches Reich were preparing their home defence against any future foreign offensive.
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
A Service Dog gives a person with a disability independence. Never approach, distract or pet a working dog, especially when (s)he is in harness. Never be afraid to ask questions to the handler (parent).
21 Oct 2015
04:53:50pm
re: Third Reich stamps - some facts and figures
Awesome cover! Wow!!!
Login to Like
this post
07:34:43am
re: Third Reich stamps - some facts and figures
Posting so Ningpo will see this topic again. I have nothing to add to the discussion.
Peter
Login to Like
this post
re: Third Reich stamps - some facts and figures
"And of course there is the very British point of view (assumed - I have no hard evidence) that it was entirely beneath us as a nation to attempt anything as underhand as influencing the populace with postage stamps! (We used big posters.)"
This perhaps in an example of a rather reserved British approach to 'propaganda'. No sabre rattling, no mention of 'the enemy' here. Just an attempt to build hope for the future and to address the imbalance of social classes, education and equal opportunities:
Login to Like
this post
re: Third Reich stamps - some facts and figures
Interesting that such socialist ideals were disseminated under Churchill's name (though I imagine he had nothing to do with this calendar). These were precisely the ideals that triggered his downfall the following July!
What we really want to know, of course, is whether it was ever suggested, at some meeting or other, that Britain should use stamps in the same way as they used posters. Or who it was that decreed (presumably with iron hand) that postage stamps were NOT to be used for any such purpose at all! The Postmasters-General at that time were William Morrison and Harry Crookshank, both Conservatives, but immediate information about both is confined to a CV which mentions their wartime role only in passing. The Ministers of Information, Duff Cooper and Brendan Bracken, may have had discussions re propaganda on stamps, but I doubt we shall easily find that out, either.
Is there something about the British 'national character' that rejects overt propaganda, as opposed to the Germans or Russians, who seem to have embraced it?
Login to Like
this post
02:15:46pm
re: Third Reich stamps - some facts and figures
Guthrum
I think British people of all social classes, have a healthy cynicism (and suspicion) which automatically looks for " a hidden agenda" in any promulgation from authority ( even where there isn't one!). We also tend to be embarrassed ( both for ourselves and the originator ) where there is what we deem to be over-enthusiasm or "gushing" in any sense.
This is why I think we also find it difficult to accept business practices from other countries which are "in your face". For instance the U.S. originating "mission statement", although it can be a useful tool, we find ( the term) to be pretentious and patronising.
It is often the presentation of ideas, rather than the content, which leads to resistance and ridicule. Possibly one of the biggest causes of difficulties between nations is an inability to understand the nuances which govern people's attitudes to certain situations.
While the English-speaking nations have a common origin, and broadly the same values, the interpretation of these values are often a million miles apart.
Malcolm
Login to Like
this post
re: Third Reich stamps - some facts and figures
"I think British people of all social classes have a healthy cynicism (and suspicion) which automatically looks for "a hidden agenda" in any promulgation from authority (even where there isn't one!). We also tend to be embarrassed (both for ourselves and the originator) where there is what we deem to be over-enthusiasm or "gushing" in any sense."
Absolutely.
But why? Where does that come from?
On another forum it is pointed out that Goebbels gained much of his propagandist understanding by studying the American sales techniques which arrived in Germany in the 1920s. (We too are pathetically in awe of American business techniques, especially when they are forced upon our own work procedures.) The pre-war German psyche has been studied extensively in an effort to understand how Hitler rose to power, but I do not know whether the British have been the subjects of similar studies. Why do we reject overt propaganda?
Login to Like
this post
re: Third Reich stamps - some facts and figures
"Why do we reject overt propaganda?"
That is a very tough question. Imagine that being asked in an examination paper!
What is apparent is that the British Government were quite aware of of this attitude. According to a paper written by Sheila Joglekar in 2004; in reference to the role BBC should play:
"An internal memorandum dating from the early 1940’s headed “War-time Propaganda†laid down as principles for propaganda programs, “no deliberate perversion of truth and avoidance of cheapness and personal ridicule.â€
The objection to such things was not based on grounds of morality, but simply that the public would not believe them."
So it would seem that we would have to venture further back in time, to find the answer to that very question.
Login to Like
this post
Auctions
re: Third Reich stamps - some facts and figures
i'd venture it has much to do with the democratic process where TWO DIFFERENT points of view (or more) are aired freely and allowed to compete. There aren't that many countries with a strong, long-standing democratic process in place. It is why America succeeded in the aftermath of its independence and most other more harshly ruled countries failed.
It is also why America has such an abysmal record of transplanting democracy to places with no history of it; we just don't understand how a nation wouldn't see the innate value of the democratic give and take (although, given the state of our current politic discourse, I'm not sure how long it's gonna stick here).
Login to Like
this post
re: Third Reich stamps - some facts and figures
provisional cancels post 1945.5 here is refernce work ...
http://www.saechsische-schwaerzung.de/
adolf hitler was a billionaire by may 1945. royalties from mein kampf and his portraits on stamps. his sister inherited his estate.
Login to Like
this post
re: Third Reich stamps - some facts and figures
What point are you trying to make here, phos45?
It is well-known that Hitler was very rich, not least because of income from 'Hitler's Culture Fund' used to pay for his art collection.
Who is this 'sister' of whom you speak? I understand some relatives attempted after the war to get their hands on his money, without success.
"After the war, Hitler's property and assets, including a house in Munich he had built for Eva Braun, were given to the state of Bavaria by the Allied Control Commission. He had no children."
That from a newspaper feature a while back, at http://www.nytimes.com/2002/08/08/world/hitler-it-seems-loved-money-and-died-rich.html
And here is an extract from another internet article:
"Hitler earned additional tens of millions of dollars licensing his image to the state for a variety of political purposes. During his reign, Hitler allowed his image to be used on German stamps and posters that pushed the Nazi propaganda machine. He did not, however, hand over his image for free. While technically German photographer Heinrich Hoffmann owned the rights to Hitler's official state portraits, most historians agree that Hoffman was likely a puppet to true beneficiary, the Fuhrer himself. As with his Mein Kampf rights, the rights to his image are now controlled by the state of Bavaria and any profits earned are distributed to charity.
During his time as an artist in Vienna, Hitler produced hundreds of paintings. Many of these were seized by The US government after WWII and will never see the light of day. Periodically however, a few of his paintings will come up for auction and fetch tens of thousands of dollars for a private seller. As with his book royalties, Hitler's distant heirs would have a legitimate claim to those profits but so far all have refused."
...which can be found at http://www.celebritynetworth.com/articles/celebrity/rich-hitler/
I tend to use Kershaw as the ultimate authority on Hitler, but do not have his work to hand at the moment.
Login to Like
this post