This article is based on a paper presented at the XXII Australasian Association for European History Conference, Perth (July 2011). I would like to thank the organising committee for the opportunity to present. Material for this article has also come from my book Family Punishment in Nazi Germany: Sippenhaft, Terror and Myth (Basingstoke, 2012).
The Sinews of the Modern Terror State: an Analysis of the Role and Importance of Family Punishment in Nazi Germany*
Version of Record online: 10 SEP 2012
© 2012 The Author. Australian Journal of Politics and History © 2012 School of History, Philosophy, Religion and Classics, School of Political Science and International Studies, The University of Queensland and Blackwell Publishing Asia Pty Ltd.
Australian Journal of Politics & History
Special Issue: War and Peace, Barbarism and Civilization in Modern Europe and Its Empires
Volume 58, Issue 3, pages 380–393, September 2012
How to Cite
Loeffel, R. (2012), The Sinews of the Modern Terror State: an Analysis of the Role and Importance of Family Punishment in Nazi Germany. Australian Journal of Politics & History, 58: 380–393. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8497.2012.01642.x
- Issue online: 10 SEP 2012
- Version of Record online: 10 SEP 2012
This article contributes to the debate over how much we can consider Nazi Germany a terror state. It is focused on one type of terror — family liability policy or Sippenhaft— as a means of determining to what extent the German population was terrorised by the regime. Sippenhaft can be considered a key foundation of a terror regime as it targets the innocent over the guilty. This paper argues that Sippenhaft was a component of Nazi terror, operating on a selective basis and was utilised by various local agencies among the party and the army rather than being centrally controlled. These factors helped create a level of threat and fear that contributed to its effectiveness.