There are basically two schools of thought on this.
The first is the way its taught in schools, that it was all seeing and had complete surveillance of society.
The second way I've seen is that the Gestapo didn't actually have to do much, it was rather german society that in effect policed itself, with denunciations that provided most of the tips that they needed.
Personally I prefer the second explanation, as it goes well with how the many of the wiemar institutions were just rolled over into slightly changed forms (save a notable few like the SS).
Discus
>>442144
>Discus
No that appears to be a shitty jpg logo flag.
>wiemar
Weimar
Go read https://www.loc.gov/rr/frd/Military_Law/pdf/NT_Nazi_Vol-I.pdf then through until Vol-IV and get back to us.
>>442144
The Gestapo had 30k employees and had to cover the whole of Germany + occupied territories. The Stasi had 90k employees (and even more snitches) and only had to cover a small part of that territory and even they didn't achieve full control. So yeah you can see what I am hinting at I guess.
>>442180
Was literally the first gestapo flag I found on google images
fuck autocorrect then
Yes I know that we said that the nazis were the big bad and how everything was their fault, (not a nazi either, if that line makes me sound like it). I would appreciate an actual response though instead of citing a book.
>>442196
>autocorrect
Historical discussion using a cellphone? Hum.
>>442180
How can this answer OPs quesion? It was written by the victors right after the war and doesn't concern with the sociology of the problem but only with the legal aspects.
>>442202
Yes and why is that a problem?
To back up my little thesis, is the fact that Goring effectively created much of the security apparatus from the Prussian police forces, which in effect means that many of the gestapo's personnel would of been ordinary policemen during the previous regime. It only would of been til the war and late war in which new personnel (and thus more brutal ways of doing things) would of become the majority of the organization.
just like all nazi organisations it was shit and ineffective
filled with imbeciles
>>442225
>Goring
>>442232
I gotta disagree. I mean what is he supposed to look for in the sources you suggested? I mean exactly. The Allies were trying to make a case against the Nazi organizations and not against the populace as a whole. What is in those volumes as far as I can see are legal documents and propaganda written by the ones with the same goal as the allies: Establishing the idea that the Nazis were in full control society. Those sources are biased on 2 levels (which ofc doesn't mean they are useless but that they won't help to answer OPs questions).
What he would need to look for are Gestapo-reports on failures and statistics of their own actions or even better reports from outside authorities on how effective Gestapo was working. Simply put stories of resilience and resistance as opposed to Nazi fiction on how society works. I did not work my way through all the volumes but I highly doubt report like this could be found in a publication from 1946 as they couldn't have checked all the archives in that small amount of time.
>>442294
>The Allies were trying to make a case against the Nazi organizations and not against the populace as a whole.
The Western allies were. Soviet evidence is somewhat different. As is the Yugoslav.
The first document in Volume 4 is German. And so it goes.
>I did not work my way through all the volumes but I highly doubt
Is this your normal approach to making synthetic claims about the past as it was?
>>442345
It is based on my experience. Time is limited, sources aren't. The default state is that corpus A can't answer question X which puts you in the position to at least indicate why it is different here.
>The first document in Volume 4 is German. And so it goes.
Yeah it is a law as I said "legal documents". How is a law on Jewish property going to help to examine how successfully the Gestapo worked? And by the way at a proper German university you wouldn't be able to quote from there since the German text is missing. So it is really not that much of a primary source on what happened between 1933 and 1945 but more of an account on how the Alliies processed the Nazis.
>>442144
I don't understand your question.
Did the Gestapo play an important role in filling the early KLs? Yes. Did they play an important role in the Rohm Putsch? Yes.
Was it their own doing? Eh, not really.
You gotta realize that the Nazis already had a good idea of who the Communists, Jehovah Witnesses, homosexuals, and asocials were. That's why the early KLs were so easily filled. They sure as hell knew who the high ranking SAs were.
The Gestapo didn't have some sort of '1984' grasp on the German society if that is what you're asking.
For more information, I suggest you read:
Backing Hitler: Consent and Coercion in Nazi Germany by Robert Gellately, PhD.
This book primarily focuses on the German civilian populations knowledge and participation in policing and the KL.
The Gestapo: A History of Horror by Jacques Delarue and Mervyn Savill.
Probably the most authoratative work in the Gestapo this far.
Hitler's Hangman: The Life of Heydrich by Robert Gerwarth.
Great biography on a man central to a number of police organizations in Nazi Germany.
Also, the aforementioned Red Series linked above gives further insight. A good number of telegrams, letters, orders (Heydrich and Muller), etc. associated with the Gestapo.
>>442345
>>I did not work my way through all the volumes but I highly doubt
Also read the sentence to the end. They did not work through the archives but used what was easily available to make the case (laws. propaganda etc.). Hell there weren't even many archives left since a shitton was burned or classified and they didn't have German-speaking historians with them to tackle the archives which were still standing. The BArch - which is THE archive regarding the history of the 3. Reich - was only founded in 1952.Now stop being a dick this is a completely logical claim that you didn't even try to refute.
>>442372
>at a proper German university you wouldn't be able to quote from there since the German text is missing.
This merely confirms my opinion of dr prof hab.s
>>442400
No, because a trial based on captured state documents, that's really not going to bring forward appropriate sources that will go to the limits of state apparatus… not at all.
>completely logical
I'm going to assume your English is limited, because otherwise you are an utter cunt when it comes to methodology.
>>442400
The Red Series is essentially their (American and British) case evidence at Nuremberg. No they didn't work through those archives; they were compiled and published a few months after the trial started, roughly halfway through the prosecutions case. Jackson states right off the bat in Volume 1's preface that it isn't the case transcripts or trial proceedings, it's the case evidence.
The last volume, Opinion and Judgement, was published in 1947.
Side note, I've got the complete set on my bookshelf. Not for everyone but goddamn if it isn't just a great source.
>>442144
As Russian writer Dovlatov put it,
>There is no end for us scolding Comrade Stalin, and rightly so. However I still want to ask: who wrote four million tips?
The problem with totalitarian regimes is that they're generally established when the majority of people actually wants them. There's no doubt that German secret police was a powerful institution but Germans WANTED to snitch on someone, they needed to channel their hate. Orwell was very much right in explaining how The Party worked. It's not enough to be executed, you have to actually love the regime. There's a reason why denazification was necessary.
Hell, here's some handy manual by everyone's favorite writer:
http://research.calvin.edu/german-propaganda-archive/angrif13.htm
>2. A dictatorship can rule against a parliament when necessary, but never against the people.
>3. Sitting on bayonets is uncomfortable.
5. A dictator’s highest duty is social justice. If people sense that the dictator only represents a thin upper class that has nothing to do with them, they will see the dictator as a hateful enemy and quickly overthrown him.
>7. A dictator does not need to follow the will of the majority. He must however have the ability to use the will of the people.
>>442689
>http://research.calvin.edu/german-propaganda-archive/angrif13.htm
Good find. Thanks.
