The dark past of Offenbach: denazification and its consequences

The dark past of Offenbach: denazification and its consequences

The processing of the National Socialist past in Germany is a complex and often controversial topic that has not lost importance more than 75 years after the end of the Second World War. In Offenbach, a city that was deeply involved in the action during the Nazi era, the denazification is still critically examined. In particular, the fate of Helmuth Schranz is discussed, which not only acted as the mayor of the city, but was also responsible for the persecution of those who think differently and the discrimination against Jews during his term. "A great injustice was celebrated here," explains local historian Gabriele Hauschke-Wicklaus, who deals intensively with the actions of Nazi valleys in Offenbach. op-online reported that between 450 and 500 Jews from Offenbach were deported, of which many never returned.

The denazification, which began after the exemption from the Americans on March 26, 1945, was supposed to free the German society from National Socialist influences, according to the allied powers. The first steps included the reformed administration and the registration of the population to check NSDAP memberships. A crucial element of the denazification process was the Spruchkammer procedure , which was formalized in March 1946 by the Liberation Act. From this point on, all Germans aged 18 and over were obliged to answer for their behavior during the Nazi era. At this time, 2.9 million people were registered in Hesse, with 59,401 reports coming from Offenbach alone.

The role of the chambers of saying

The saying chambers, which were occupied with often unspecified citizens, had the task of assessing and classifying Nazi perpetrators. Categories such as full -civil, burdened, less loaded or fellow travelers were introduced. Helmuth Schranz was classified in 1948 as a follower, which brought him no significant damage to his political career. This throws a light on the contradictions and the questionability of the denazification process, which in the early years classified many Nazi perpetrators in a discounted category. The saying chamber in Offenbach already hired its work on October 1, 1948. wikipedia declared that over 2.5 million Germans were assessed in the western occupation zones in the western occupation zones, 54 percent being classified as follows.

The consequences of these mild classifications were far -reaching. Many of those who were considered to be a follow -up were able to continue or start remarkable careers in the Federal Republic of Germany after 1949. The reserved attitude towards the question of guilt has not been discussed in the public discussion for decades, until in 1963 the Auschwitz process was finally started to comprehensively process the topic. This shows how the way to deal with the Nazi story of contradictions and a slow social rethinking was shaped.

The deep entanglement of Offenbach in the Nazi era and the associated files of denazification are more than just a culture of remembrance; They are part of a wider German historical heritage that still urgently needs to be considered and discussed. The case of Helmuth Schranz is an example of the challenges that go hand in hand with the processing of recent German history.