Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (1049)
- Monograph/Edited Volume (452)
- Review (221)
- Doctoral Thesis (213)
- Part of a Book (73)
- Other (18)
- Master's Thesis (16)
- Part of Periodical (9)
- Postprint (8)
- Conference Proceeding (7)
Language
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (2088) (remove)
Keywords
- Cold War (6)
- Geschichte (6)
- Antike (5)
- GDR (5)
- Kalter Krieg (5)
- Second World War (5)
- DDR (4)
- East Germany (4)
- Germany (4)
- Lateinunterricht (4)
Institute
- Historisches Institut (2088) (remove)
After the Second World War, Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini were singled out as evil geniuses who misled the masses and plunged them into an “unwanted war.”
In relation to their armed forces, this narrative argued that the generals under their command had been demoted to powerless tools in the hands of the dictators, having to follow orders and with no sway over decision-making.
It was further asserted that Germany and Italy had not been able to secure a victory due to the dictators’ meddling. Yet, as this chapter shows, there are important differences between the German and Italian cases.
The chapter compares both the command structures in which the dictators operated as well as their grand strategies and how they cooperated during the war.
Their personal relationship will be also analyzed, as it is impossible to look at the Axis without understanding the complex personal relationship at the very top.
The strategies of both Hitler and Mussolini will be looked at and how each leader behaved in terms of working with their closest ally, together with some examples of cooperation on the lower military rungs.
Ada (Fishman) Maimon
(2023)
Der Föderalismus, dessen Wurzeln bis in das Mittelalter zurückreichen, gehört zu den Grundtatsachen der deutschen Geschichte. Dieses historische Erbe spiegelt sich in der heutigen deutschen Staatlichkeit wider, wie sie im Grundgesetz verankert ist und von Bund, Ländern und Kommunen mit Leben erfüllt wird. Renommierte Historiker, Politologen und Rechtswissenschaftler zeichnen in diesem Band die grundlegenden Entwicklungen der Föderalismusgeschichte in Deutschland seit der Gründung des deutschen Nationalstaats (1871) nach. Sie zeigen dabei die Kontinuitäten und Systembrüche deutscher Staatlichkeit auf – vom Kaiserreich über die Weimarer Republik und den NS-Staat bis hin zur Gegenwart in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland.
Wie wurden die Soldaten der Wehrmacht – in der Kaserne und an der Front – von ihren Unteroffizieren und Offizieren behandelt? Wie war deren Menschenführung beeinflusst vom Nationalsozialismus und welche Bedeutung hatte sie für den Zusammenhalt des deutschen Heeres im Zweiten Weltkrieg? Konstantin Franz Eckert schließt, gestützt auf eine breite Quellenbasis, eine wichtige Forschungslücke. Seine Studie zeigt, wie junge Männer auf ihren Militärdienst vorbereitet wurden und was sie von ihren Vorgesetzten erwarteten. Sie weist nach, dass Vorbild und persönlicher Einsatz, Konstruktivität und absolute Unterordnung unter das Gehorsamsprinzip im Dienst des NS-Regimes zentrale Führungselemente der Wehrmacht waren. Zudem wirft sie einen Blick auf die militärische Ausbildung und ordnet die alten Narrative vom »Kasernenhofschleifer« sachlich ein.
Over the six decades since it officially ended, the Algerian War has become a key event for marking, retrospectively, the beginning of a new era in European, Western and global history. This new era is characterized by the proclaimed end of Western hegemony – by the proclaimed end of European history as global, universal history. This era, our era, understands itself as the time after the domination of the West, a time or multiple times of “post”: the time of postcolonialism, but also postmodernity, postsecularism, posthumanism.
The times of “post” are characterized by a fundamental reconfiguration of the relations between European civilization and its Others, first and foremost by the proclaimed split between Europe and its Others, and more generally by the disintegration, disruption and dispersion of the – allegedly – unified space of culture, knowledge and discourse. The postcolonial era is an era of diversity and difference, an era of dispersions and diasporas, where the space of culture is a space of multiple cultures, a space of in-between, of “inter”: the space of the intercultural, but also the interreligious, interethnic, interracial and inter-epistemic.
This conference will reflect on the “inter” in the time of “post”. We invited scholars, thinkers, intellectuals and artists to discuss various aspects and models of intercultural dynamics that have been developed and articulated in the aftermath of the Algerian War or of other events that marked the decline of Western hegemony, such as the Second Vatican, May 1968 or the Vietnam War. How did the age of decolonization reshape the discourse and practice of intercultural relations? To what extent interculturality itself is a sign or a site of decolonization? To what extent, on the contrary, intercultural relations may reproduce colonial or generate neocolonial patterns?
Contributions examine the emergence of intercultural notions and practices in various intellectual traditions, European or non-European; the development of new categories and constellations of identity, otherness and dialogue; the interrelations between epistemic, cultural, discursive, religious and political aspects; as well as reactions to these new developments and various forms of critique and resistance. We are especially interested in how this reflection may shed light on socio-political and cultural phenomena, trends and concerns of the present time.