Actually we called them Mitläufer (going along with the dominant party in fear of punishment)... but they sure weren't any better than Nazis.
Sounds like a bunch of shitty historians.
Of course the motives matter, most of all for a good historian. Those who wish to reconstruct the past shall not be deterred from their goal just because "nobody cares anymore". Fidelity to an accurate representation of the past is the only acceptable rendition of history, otherwise why even bother.
The history of Western Europe, the Middle East, Sub-Saharan Africa, and the Americas is littered with "reformed Nazis" who came out of the 2nd World War pledging themselves to the cause of US/UK Capitalist Imperialism. It is not merely that we disregarded the intentions of the Reluctant Wehrmacht. It is that we found many of these fascists to be useful - either as expendable shock troops during the Cold War or as spies, scientists, and bureaucrats in postwar states still invested in a politically correct form of apartheid.
You can find the breadcrumb trail of German Fascism leading out of Berlin and into Buenos Aeries, Cape Town, and Huntsville Alabama. These fuckers never actually went away.
Don't forget about the regular capitalists. Many of the richest German industrialists today are direct heirs of Nazis who actively helped Hitler gain power, built a personal empire from slave labor, faced no consequences for their actions, and were allowed to keep operating after the war.
They never went away because their ideals were not defeated. They went away into a USA that segregated blacks from whites and had Japanese internment camps. You blame Nazis as the source, but they are merely a symptom of a human condition. And as long as we don't collectively uplift ourselves, it's never going to be overcome, no matter how many proponents are killed off or muffled in the background.
Ah yes removing nuance, always a win.
This list is conveniently leaving out the motive of 'being threatened', because motives do sometimes matter.
The proper term is "nazi-collaborateur".
And no I am of course not condoning any violence.
I am pretty sure if you join the Nazi party, you are a Nazi.
A Nazi collaborator would be... a non Nazi, who worked with Nazis.
Some collaborators had the choice to either join the party later on or openly oppose them. In germany people who joined the party after the war started are often viewed different from those who followed early on.
Just today i heared a podcast about Werner Foßmann and the fact that he joined the party in the early 30s was a point against him.
Good point
The quote clearly states 'joined the party', those are NOT collaborateurs, those are members of the Nazi party, or as explained - Nazis.
Nobody was threatened to join the party, historians agree on that, people who joined were either true believers or did so to gain some sort of advantage.
The NSDAP, at their peak had 8.5 million members (1945), so around 20-25% of the German population at the time. We can argue about the other 80%, there is some nuance to be found there, of course. But those 20% Nazi Party members were Nazis, no nuance needed.
Ok I can agree with that
Your comment is very nuanced btw
No one was really threatened with violence to join the Nazi party.
It never was a decision between joining and dying, or joining and going to prison.The choice for most was joining or losing an opportunity to advance their career.
Even the guards at the concentration camps did the job voluntarily. Being offered the position was a chance to live like a medieval lord, with a mansion, servants, and actual direct power over people's lives. The alternative was to continue living a mediocre life in Germany. That was enough incentive for enough people to staff the camps.
Me, among others.
