Talk:Nazi songs/Archive 1

Archive 1

Why I moved this page to Nazi Songs

I moved this page to Nazi Songs because of the unwieldy nature of the original page title, Songs of the Third Reich. It seems to me that the title Nazi Songs is far more intuitive, simple, and easy to remember than the longer former title. Scott P. 20:47, Apr 25, 2004 (UTC)

It's also wrong as Deutschland über Alles was adopted in 1922 as the national anthem and is therefore not a Nazi song. -- Dissident (Talk) 21:03, 6 May 2004 (UTC)

• Why is the word "Juden" replaced by asterisks? Yes, the song is offensive, but the word "Jews" itself is not. These songs are presumably here as documentation of the offensive beliefs of the Nazis, and Bowdlerizing them defeats the point. In any case, this should probably be moved to Wikisource, as it is a collection of source texts used to illustrate other articles. -- The Anome 08:04, 30 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Do what you want. Out of respect I censored the word because someone put it on the deletion list. Maybe it offends some. If it offends, I put asteriks there. I did it out of courtesy, some may think it offensive. If others do not like the "courtesy" they can restore the word. I leave it to others to decide.WHEELER 20:45, 3 May 2004 (UTC)

I think it's silly to censor the word "Jews". All this does, in fact, is white wash the Nazis. AndyL 21:07, 3 May 2004 (UTC)

Translation of "ruhig"

"silent solid steps" Were the SA's steps (with leather boots?) silent when they were marching? Perhaps here ruhig rather means something like "calm". Apokrif 19:00, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes, "ruhig" is not refered to the boot steps, but more to the mind of the persons who walk there. They are "ruhig", because they are sure about the "righteouseness" of their political movement.

It means -steadily- in this context Guest 8:00, 19 October 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.3.198.197 (talk)

German Anthem

I would like to remove the German anthem from this page. It isn't a nazi song, the nazis used to sing only the first part of it and sang instead of the rest the Horst-Wessellied ("Die Fahne Hoch") after it. However, the german anthem was used again (in full length) after the WW2, until the reunification of West and Middle Germany (1989/90). (Though they sang only the third part of it) After unification only the third part is the "official" anthem. But there is no law saying that, the use of the german anthem is until now regulated by a simple mail-correspondence between chancellor and president. I am sorry for my bad english, but I hope you understand what I am trying to explain - as a german you can get hard feelings if an encylopedia lists your national anthem under / between nazi songs. I am simple offended and I guess it wasn't intentioned to offend probably 80 million germans with this article... think about it ;) --80.130.103.248 06:20, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Since anyone answered, I edited the page. I removed the whole part about the german anthem (Das Lied der Deutschen), but I adapted a part in the section of the Horst-Wessel-Lied, which says that the Horst-Wessel-Lied was sung since the 12th July 1933 after the first stanza of the "Lied der Deutschen". Another wrong part, saying that the "Lied der Deutschen" was pre-1945 anthem was corrected too, because it was in fact until november 1991 in all three stanzas the anthem of the Federal Republic of Germany. (After that, only the third stanza). If you are wondering, they sang after May 1952 only the third stanza, though all three stanzas were part of the anthem.

This is btw not a easy topic, some people over here in Germany still believe the first and second stanza were forbidden, though this isn't true. This shows, that people tend not to know that it was our anthem until 1991. Again, I am sorry for my bad english. --80.130.73.219 02:20, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Except that isn't true. The 1991 declaration simply reiterated that the third verse alone was the anthem for united Germany, just as it had been for West Germany. I have adjusted the text.  ProhibitOnions  ^(T) 09:10, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Well it is a fact that the entire "Lied der Deutschen" was the anthem of the Federal Republic of Germany until 1991, as it was "declared" by a mail exchange between president Theodor Heuss and chancellor Konrad Adenauer in the year 1952. I think you can even read that in the english article about the "Lied der Deutschen". However, I won't edit it back, I have no intention to start an edit war, though I thought an encyclopedia is there to make knowledge based on facts available, not "knowledge" based on what people believe.

I am a little disappointed, but maybee there are differences between the quality of the Wikipedia in different languages. I for myself won't contribute to the english version anymore, since it makes no sense to help a community which can't differentiate. --80.130.74.52 03:39, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

The words to the German Anthem may have been written in 1841, but the music was written by Joseph Haydn in 1797 for the "Emperor's Hymn" Gott erhalte Franz den Kaiser. Like many Austrians, Haydn was at least an ethnic mixture - many (cf Sir William Hadow et al) believe he was a Croat! Ironic that the music of a Croat who spent most of his life working for a Magyar becomes the German National Anthem! Sasha 08:38, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Lili Marlene

I hear that Marlene Dietrich's song "Lili Marlene" was sang by Nazis when they got to war. Is this true, or it't rumor? -Amy M. G. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.46.134.252 (talk) 10:35, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

"Lili Marlene" had the distinction of being sung by both sides during World War II. Its appeal to soldiers lies partly in the lyrics, with which many of them could identify, and partly in its quality as a march tune. It is actually a World War I German song. Ironically Dr Joseph Goebbels, the German propaganda minister, tried to suppress the song, but it remained popular in the Wehrmacht, even being played over Radio Belgrade at the request of General Erwin Rommel. The connection between the song and Marlene Dietrich is that she sang it on a recording, but that was after World War II. The English Wikipedia article on "Lili Marlene" has more information. Richard David Ramsey 04:38, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

"Es zittern die morschen Knochen": translation?

Seems odd that there isn't one... The odd reason is probably that the used grammar is odd. I just did that translation myself. As English is not my mothers tongue, I will put it here so you can decide if you put it into the article or not.

1: The rotten bones are trembling Of the world ahead of the red war, We've bursted the terror, For us it was a great victory.

Ref: We will march on When everything breaks into shards, Because today we own germany And tomorrow we'll own the whole world.

2: And lies after the fight in ashes The whole world in a mess, Confound it, We'll build it up again.

(Ref)

3: Albeit the aged are nagging, Let them uproar and cry, And if worlds sets their face against us, We will be the winners anyways.

(Ref)

4: They don't wand to comprehend the song, They think of slavery and war. In the meanwhile our acres are riping, You flag of freedom fly!

We will march on, When everything breaks into shards; The freedom rised in germany And tomorrow it (the freedom) will own the world.

In this context morsch means frail. The mind really boggles at the image of 'rotten [!]' bones trembling. Norvo 06:53, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

I've made some minor changes to the article itself. It's useful to know that this was the official song of the Hitler Youth, which helps to explain the hostile remarks about the elderly and about 'frail bones' and so forth. There was a 'soft' and a 'hard' version - a point readily conceded by the author (and composer) Hans Baumann in an interview in the 1970s. Norvo 16:39, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Right. Here's a very plain translation that simply seeks to reproduce the meaning of the original:

1: The frail bones of the world are trembling / At the prospect of the Red War [war against the Reds]. / We’ve overcome the fear; / For us it was a great victory.

Refrain: We’ll carry on marching / Even if everything falls into ruins, / For today we have Germany - / Tomorrow the whole world!

2: And if the whole world is one heap / Of rubble after the battle, / What the devil do we care? / We'll build it up again.

(Refrain)

3: And if the aged curse, / Let them rage and shout / And if whole worlds resist us / We’ll be the victors any way!

(Refrain)

4: They don't want to comprehend the song, / They think of slavery and war. / In the meantime our fields are bearing fruit. / You flag of freedom, fly!

We’ ll carry on marching / Even if everything falls into ruins. / The freedom rose in Germany / And tomorrow it [freedom] will own the world. Norvo 02:50, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

The refrain is NOT correct. The original Hans Baumann text was "Denn heute da hört uns Deutschland, und Morgen die ganze Welt", which means "Today Germany hears us, and tomorrow the whole World"

The "gehört" version was NOT written by Baumann, never published in print, nor was it recorded in Germany. But the American war propaganda used it, and there you have the source. Here's the American propaganda poster: [1] —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 213.114.121.146 (talk) 23:31, 17 December 2006 (UTC).

You vastly overrate the power of American propaganda. In an interview Hans Baumann himself said there were of course two versions of the refrain - a 'hard' version with gehõrt and a 'soft' version with da hőrt. You'll find that it was the hard version that was popular. See Hans Baumann for further detail. Norvo 13:01, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

The "hard version" isn't in the SA, SS, WH, HJ nor RAD song books, which I find strange if the "soft version" only was meant for the "girls in the BdM". The only recordings of the song is the "soft version". Accoring to the german Wikipedia, it's "still disputed" if the song was sung "gehört" before 1945. "Bis heute ist umstritten, ob vor 1945 häufiger heute, da hört … oder heute gehört uns Deutschland, und morgen die ganze Welt gesungen wurde." The only conclusion one can draw is that the "gehört" version wasn't the popular one before 1945, and any interview with Baumann saying otherwise after the war should be taken with a grain of salt. After the war Baumann had to say that the NS ideology and his songs were evil, or he wouldn't be able to continue working. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.226.49.233 (talk) 20:44, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

• Umm, the translation sucks pretty much because it really has little to do with the original version. Am I allowed to change it into a more literal translation or do you want it to stay as it is now? --87.168.120.53 (talk) 15:42, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Let's move this here

Please notice how many times, "Reaction" is used. I tried to put in the right definition of reaction under the page of reactionary but a group of people are determined not to let that happen. They are determined to make the term reactionary mean fascism.

Now as it stands; Reaction means Fascist so when Fascists sing, "Want no reaction", they deny their ownselves because they sing "Want no Fascists" because reaction=fascism in l930. That is now the definition of reaction.

This shows the total hypocrisy of Wikipedia. This shows how revisionism is rampant at Wikipedia. This shows that when they do their revisionism, now everthing has become nonsense.

For the real definition of reaction please see the page history before they did their revisionism thing. It only makes sense then.WHEELER 16:24, 24 Apr 2004 (UTC) The site is now a good one, as much as can be expected.WHEELER 19:07, 29 Apr 2004 (UTC)

WHEELER, the Nazis saw themselves as revolutionary, what is meant by reaction in the song is they oppose any opposition to the Nazi "revolution" yet, in the song, they also talk about their opposition to Marxism. You yourself say that opposition to "Bolshevism" is reactionary. AndyL 16:30, 24 Apr 2004 (UTC)

How is this an encylopedia entry? It's just a straight quote with no background information?AndyL 17:44, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)

This article is now a mere collection of source texts. What's the encyclopedic context? -- The Anome 19:20, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Reaction meant Von Pappen. "Von" is an aristocratic appelation. It was two aristocrats that first prevented Hitler's rise and they were murdered in the "Reichsmorder week". This is "Reaction". They are singing against Bismark, Von Pappen and the other "vons". They are singing against their *enemies* The Reaction and their *competitors* Red Front

I will add that this is a stub.WHEELER 19:22, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Or you can move it Wikisource or something but i would like to have this linked in here somewhere. I provide this only to prove the leftist character of the Nazi movement. WHEELER 19:47, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)

• On a response to Andy---Only leftist are revolutionaries. Only revolutionaries man the baricades. Only revolutionaries come out the French Revolution.

You know what the fault of Americans are: They see things only throug democratic lenses. They have never experienced the European history of monarchism. I lived for three and half years in Europe. Living and meeting aristocracy. America is like a pond. It is self insulating and inbreed.WHEELER 19:52, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)

"Hitler's attempt, in co-operation with General Ludendorff, to unseat the German government in November, l923, through an open rebellion in Munich, was foiled through the efforsts of the local Reichswehr under the command of Von Lossow, and the refusal of Von Kahr, Bavarian Prime minister, to accommodate the Fuhrer. (Von Kahr and Von Lossow were murdered in the Reichsmordwoche, the "Blood Purge", June 30, l934.). From that time on Hitler's hatred for the Junkers, the Reichwehr and all clerical politicians was boundless: his paladins in the army were in the end all non-Junkers such as Jodl, Guderian and "die Keitel". P. F. Drucker was quite right when he said of Hitler's relation to the German army that the Fuhrer "hated it just as much as any German Liberal did." The Church, ably led by Cardinal von Faulhaber, also opposed Hitler on principle." Liberty or Equality pg 260. WHEELER 20:34, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)

National Socialism was radical and revolutionary. Communists are as well, but with a class, rather than a national/race basis. The first fascist, Mussolini, saw his movement as a radical movement (formed to overturn and re-construct society from the ground up) and himself as a man of the left (he was praised by Lenin in his earlier days). When declaring war on Britain and France in 1940, he said, "This [declaration of war] is only a formality. We have actualy been at war since the day we first lifted the flag of our revolution against the democratic world!"

The Leninists who come here and try to deny the radical nature of the various fascist movements will also claim that anyone who is against Lenin is a fascist, really. In the last days of Weimar, they called the democratic socialists 'social fascists'. If you are not their kind of radical, you are no radical at all, you see.

The fact is, Communists and Fascists are not enemies. They are rivals. Of course they are both going to denounce 'reaction'. Be sure to highlight Nazi use of the term in their songs. 65.89.68.24 (talk) 15:58, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Mistakes

I found two mistakes in the introduction of the article. Can somebody who speaks English better then me please correct them?

1. Singing Die Wacht am Rhein is not forbidden.
2. It is only forbidden so sing the first stanza of the Lied der Deuschen: the third stanza is the oficial national antheme of Germany. --Oliver Tölkes 22:24, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
3. I thought the correct text of the refrain of Es zittern die morschen Knochen is: Heute gehört uns Deutschland, und Morgen die ganze Welt", which means: Today Germany belongs to us and tomorrow the entire world". Am I right? RJB-nl (talk) 21:16, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

no, you are wrong. the correct text is:

"Heute da hört uns Deutschland..." (Today Germany hears(!) us) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.44.187.188 (talk) 22:50, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

This "little" alteration is probably a Allied propaganda lie. See below. --62.226.9.120 (talk) 18:22, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Allied propaganda?

The article states

Many Germans know the quote "Heute gehört uns Deutschland und morgen die ganze Welt", but few know the song as a whole. The original song's refrain was "Denn heute, da hört uns Deutschland/und morgen die ganze Welt" (for today, Germany hears us/and tomorrow, the whole world). This was altered later to "Denn heute gehört uns Deutschland/...", meaning "For today, Germany is ours/...".

The MP3 version of the song clearly shows that "da hört" is incorrect and "erhöht" (listens to, pays attention to) is correct. The word "erhöht" is also easily confused with "gehort" (belongs to) when sung, which emphasizes the error and explains the incorrect interpretations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.245.247.3 (talk) 14:21, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Without making clear who altered "Denn heute, da hört uns Deutschland/und morgen die ganze Welt" ("for today, Germany hears us/and tomorrow, the whole world") to "Denn heute, da gehört uns Deutschland/und morgen die ganze Welt" ("for today, Germany is ours/and tomorrow, the whole world"). This small alteration appears to fit into the Allied propaganda lie that Germany wanted to conqueror the whole world and unless the alteration really was made by the Germans, which I doubt, this should be mentioned. --62.226.9.120 (talk) 18:18, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Nazi songs. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160304132954/http://www.kollektives-gedaechtnis.de/texte/vor45/lieder.html to http://kollektives-gedaechtnis.de/texte/vor45/lieder.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:53, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Recent edit

Preserving here by providing this link. My rationale was: "WP:NOTLYRICS; rm non RS citations". --K.e.coffman (talk) 00:45, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

Opening paragraph

I'm uncomfortable with the opening paragraph, which defines what the article is about, and I mean both the previous and the current definition.

Nazi songs were "the songs and marches written the Nazi Party in Germany" (the previous one) is clumsy and misleading. The Nazi party itself did not write anything. And many songs were sung by the armed forces' members during the Nazi era without having being imposed or commissioned by the party.

Nazi songs "were songs and marches used during the era of the Third Reich in Germany" (the current one) is too wide; there were songs "used" during the era of the Third Reich that were not of Nazi nature. Light music and variety did not cease during that time; UFA produced many apolitical, light films, some with songs. (See Nazism and cinema, List of German films of 1933–45, and this thesis.)

And to be blunt, I'm not too find of the term "used" as such, unless it's followed by a clear elaboration, i.e. who uses what.

If we're going to include songs famously used (or promoted) by the Nazi regime or its military, we will have to include items such as the romantic song Lili Marleen which were gladly sang by soldiers. The Erika march was of similar, seemingly insouciant nature but it's still today a distinct mark of Nazi loyalty.

So, I'd suggest something along these lines: "Nazi songs are the songs and marches that were written by Nazis, or used extensively by the Nazi party and its members or the German armed forces during the Nazi era." Magnus2108, K.e.coffman, Staszek Lem, and the rest, any comments? -The Gnome (talk) 10:23, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

Yes, it is a good idea. Just like swastika, some songs were forever tainted by the Nazis and now are associated with nothing but Nazism. Accordingly, I would suggest to rename the article to Songs of Nazi Germany. Staszek Lem (talk) 16:56, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. I find the current title to be alright, honestly. This is about Nazi songs and not about songs popular during the Nazi era in general. It's the definition of what is a "Nazi song" that troubles me. We need to have something that covers the Nazi aspect of the songs the article covers, and, at the same time, leaves out songs that just happened to be popular during that era, e.g. some jazz tunes. -The Gnome (talk) 19:23, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

September 2018 edit

I undid the restoration of material by Special:Contributions/ReverendSpecialK, per WP:NOTLYRICS and WP:NPOV. --K.e.coffman (talk) 02:55, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

I am restoring the edit. You are removing content that belongs here. I suspect you have a ulterior motive. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ReverendSpecialK (talk • contribs) 17:51, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

I reverted the edit; preserving here by providing this link. The material is not supported by reliable sources. Please see WP:BURDEN. --K.e.coffman (talk) 04:14, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

Typically we would not include lyrics in articles, see Wikipedia:Lyrics and poetry. It would be even less likely to include multiple sets of lyrics to different songs. — billinghurst sDrewth 23:29, 23 December 2018 (UTC)