No, Hitler was not a vegetarian! This is a myth that the Third Reich publicists wanted people to believe, something nice and personable about Hitler. But it was simply propaganda. Then the opposers of the anti-vivisectionist movement (or animal torturers) picked up the propaganda and ran with it to try to discredit the anti-vivisectionist movement. Here is more support for my argument:
one of the more common accusations made by animal rights opponents is that Hitler was a vegetarian; by this, they appear to be saying that this establishes a sinister link between animal-rights/vegetarianism and Hitler/Nazism(!). In fact there is incontrovertible evidence that Hitler was not vegetarian and ate food of animal origin. Consequently, the only response that animal rights opponents can then offer to preserve an incorrect and pointless accusation is to assert that while Hitler was not a 'strict' vegetarian, this also applies to many other people who call themselves vegetarian: therefore, so they maintain, Hitler was a vegetarian. From this, the animal rights opponents will argue that as Hitler may be deemed vegetarian, and this is the lifestyle adopted by animal rights campaigners, this surely indicates the presence of a sinister link between them. At this point it is possible to appreciate the infantile and puerile nature of anti-animal rights argumentation.
The simple fact of the matter is that as Hitler ate food derived from animal corpses, he was not a vegetarian. In sum, a person is either a vegetarian or is not a vegetarian. There is no grey area available to rescue the animal rights opponents.
In fact, even if Hitler had been a devout, strict, vegetarian, this would have no relevance whatsoever to the matter of animal rights as his diet only arose from his wish to maintain his health: this is confirmed by his colleagues. Prof. Ian Kershaw cites the testimony of the Hanfstaengls with whom Hitler stayed during the Christmas of 1924: 'Hitler subsequently explained that he had begun on leaving Landsberg to cut out meat and alcohol to lose weight. He had convinced himself that meat and alcohol were harmful for him, and, in his fanatical way...finally made a dogma out of it'. The fact that Hitler's supposed vegetarian arose from a concern for his own health rather than any interest in animals was confirmed by his colleague Albert Krebs who recalled an incident in 1932: 'Hitler explained that a variety of worrying symptoms - outbreak of sweating, nervous tension, trembling of muscles, and stomach cramps - had persuaded him to become a vegetarian'.[10] Van der Vat comments that because of a 'chronic digestive disorder, [this] led Hitler to believe he would not live long', and rather than submitting to a proper medical investigation, Hitler 'turned to eccentric, self-prescribed vegetarian diets'.[11]
There is the further point that if Hitler had viewed vegetarianism as morally necessary (rather than a personal health issue) he would have not outlawed the German Vegetarian Society and would have advocated vegetarianism for the German people and demanded it from the leading Nazis: however he did not do so, simply because it related to his own health problems rather than any ethical stance. The only other factor that contributed to the myth of Hitler's supposed vegetarianism was the idea, primarily advanced by Goebbels, the propaganda minister, that Hitler was something more than an ordinary human, i.e., saying (incorrectly) that he refrained from certain habits that 'normal' human beings engage in, e.g., 'Our Fuhrer Adolf Hitler drinks no alcohol and does not smoke...His performance at work is incredible...'.[12] This was considered an essential part of what became the fuhrer cult:
Hitler is the alpha and omega of our world philosophy. Every National Socialist house must have a place in which the fuhrer is near at hand. Generous hands and hearts must offer him small tributes every day at such a place in the form of flowers and plants.[13]
Some Party officials 'went so far as to claim that the only historical parallel with Hitler, who had begun with seven men and now attracted a huge mass following, was that of Jesus Christ'.[14]
The article What sort of vegetarian was Hitler?, by Donal O'Driscoll discusses the issue:
For those fighting for the abolition of vivisection it is not uncommon to be labelled as nazis by its defenders in their efforts to discredit with ad hominem attacks when their science fails them. This is not simply a question of basic insult. Its ugly head rises continually rises as the pro-vivisection have found themselves a bit of twentieth century mythology of sufficient impact to latch onto. What it boils down to is that the Nazi Party of Hitler's German claimed to respect animal rights and therefore all animal rights activists must be of the same calibre. The flaw in this argument is apparent to all who pause for a minute to think about the logic behind it. The same logic would have us branding as fascist anyone with blue eyes and blond hair.
Rather than go into detail as to the various logical flaws of this standpoint - odd for men and women of science where logic is [supposedly] the basis of their work, we are going to concentrate on the Nazis themselves and see how far the claims made by the pro-vivisectionists for them are actually true.
This roughly divides into two issues: the extent and nature of vivisection in Nazi Germany and the laws controlling the use of animals in their science and society; and what sort of vegetarian was Hitler. The former has already been explored elsewhere in the essays and work of Roberta Kalechofsky (Founder of Jews for Animal Rights),[7] and Jeremy Caudle. It is the latter we shall concentrate on in this article since there seems to be as much confusion among those fighting vivisection as those proposing it. Though some would argue that we can not separate Hitler's opinion on vivisection and vegetarianism, this article is being constructed from the point of view of criticisms leveled at the modern anti-vivisection and vegetarianism movements which are sufficiently distinct to make this separation necessary to keep the issues at stake clear. For those who say that Hitler was a supporter of animal rights as defined in the modern language of Singer and Regan, then the quick answer is that in this philosophy there is no room for a person who tests out his cyanide pill on his pet dog...
The answer to the "accusation" that Hitler was a vegetarian, is that those who make this claim are as much victims of the man as those who believed in his lies at the time. Hindsight has given us the advantage to see through his other claims and posturings so why should we fall for this one as well.
We will start with the question as to why Hitler espoused vegetarianism then discuss how good a vegetarian he was. What seems to accepted throughout the various sources and historians that this claim first surfaces in or before the year 1931. After this we get into the principle region of confusion as there seemingly two schools of thought.
The first is that Hitler was told to go vegetarian on the advice of his doctors. In the years of the Weimar Republic which governed Germany following World War I until the Nazis took power, vegetarianism was seen as a health fad for which much good was claimed. In particular it was espoused by one of Hitler's heroes, the composer Wagner. Wagner believed that vegetarianism promoted vitality, long life and physical fitness, all things important to Hitler (though not practised by) and which he was to attribute to vegetarianism. Hitler also had a chronic stomach condition which was to trouble him for the majority of his life. Connected with this was a flatulence problem. He believed that a diet of vegetables helped to settle his stomach and remove the odors of the latter.
The second is that Hitler became vegetarian as a result of the death of his niece Geli in 1931. Geli, full name Angela Raubal, was the daughter of Hitler's step-sister who was acting as his housekeeper from 1929. Between 1929 and 1931 Hitler became very attached to Geli, forming a possessive and jealous relationship over her that developed into an infatuation. His feeling for her does not appear to have been reciprocated and in September 1938 she shot herself. There are several theories around her death and some mystery remains due to lack of direct evidence more than anything else; however the important issue here is that it had a very profound effect on Hitler. For the rest of his life he had a photo of her in his room which flowers were placed in front of every year on the anniversaries of her birth and her death. Many statements as to Hitler's vegetarianism are derived from this period. Indeed the diaries of one of his secretaries states that it was as a result of Geli's death that he turned vegetarian.
So which of the above view points are correct? The first thing to note that his doctors recommended that he became vegetarian but he did not seem to follow their advice more than intermittently. However, the idea was planted in his mind, and the death of his niece, which we know made a profound and lasting shock on him. His vegetarianism, or rather his definition of it, seems to have become stronger after the death of Geli Raubal. Up until then vegetarianism was associated with his feeling better from his stomach problems and other conditions, though there was some evidence that there was some cross pollination of the idea of meat being bad for him with the idea of death, another very important subject in his life was already occurring in the early 1920's, viz during his relationship with Mimi Reiter.[2]
However, it was not until Geli's death, triggering a much more pronounced fixation with death did he start to fully link it with his own health which in turn, following doctors and Wagner, he linked with vegetarianism. The result is now an abhorrence of meat and the real espousal of vegetarianism as a way of life, as can be so readily found in the diaries of Goebbels. That it was the death of Geli which brought about this shift of position, from a health fad to a full blown way of life is testified to in the diaries of his secretaries at the time and the well known comment to Göring that he refused to eat a piece of ham on the grounds that it reminded him of a corpse. This position has been taken by a number of historians including Albert Speer, Robert Payne and John Toland. Hitler's friend, Frau Hess, is given in Toland as having said that he never ate meat after Geli's death except liver dumplings.
So on the face of it the evidence so far does seem to support the assertation that Hitler was a vegetarian. However, we still have to discuss how well he carried it out. Are we going to simply accept the ideal of the ascetic leader, favoured by Goebbels,[3] of which the vegetarianism was wound in to promote further comparisons with Ghandi? As with much in his life in this too he was a chronic liar both to himself and others.[2]
Before 1931 there is a situation familiar to many of us - we hear and appreciate the doctors' advice but in the face of giving up a pleasure we do not necessarily follow it. This holds equally true of Hitler. His love of certain meat, in particular liver dumplings and Bavarian sausages,[8] is well known and he found it difficult to give up meat altogether. It mostly depended on how much trouble he was receiving from his stomach as to how seriously he took the vegetarian diet...
In the late 1930's we have the testimony of a hotel chef in Hamburg called Dione Lucas saying that Hitler's favourite dish was stuffed and roasted baby pigeon.[4] In 1937 there was an article in the New York Times on Hitler where he is described as a vegetarian who loved ham and caviar!![7]
It is important to point out here that there are documented cased where he ordered his chef to prepare vegetarian dishes,[5] but as pointed out above this can be regarded as him reacting to increased stomach trouble at the time. Looking closer at this statement it is odd that for such a powerful figure that he would have to specifically order vegetarian dishes, when if he was such a professed vegetarian, this would have been taken as a matter of course.
This all fits in with the details given in the The Medical Casebook of Adolf Hitler by Leonard and Renate Heston,[6] which chronicles his stomach ailments and the various food explorations that he tried to settle it. The overall picture is that he was more concerned about his own mortality and pain, but when he felt good he was not adverse to delving back into meat. Meanwhile, he was keeping up the facade of a vegetarian diet to his friends as is attested in Goebbels diaries,[1] the latter fully believing Hitler's sermonizing on the subject.
For a person who manage to stamp so much of himself on the country he ruled at the time, there is no evidence that he tried to do the same with vegetarianism. And yet he enforced other stringent health measures including anti-smoking laws. Indeed the opposite seems to have been the case if the treatment of the various vegetarian societies are anything to go by. Though individual vegetarians were not persecuted, their societies were being forced to leave the International Vegetarian Union and subjected to Gestapo raids and stringent conditions.
So what are we left with? Accepting that Hitler was a proclaimed vegetarian we get a very poor impression of what that actually meant. Certainly by our standards he would he would not rank as one. At best he appears as a hypocrite, his problems not medical but seated much deeper in his psyche...His reasons for his belief were based on health, not moral, grounds. In fact I would go so far as to say that Hitler's vegetarianism is nothing more than a label he adopted to suit himself. Those who use the two words together are guilty of falling foul of Hitler's own propaganda. In their glee they seize on the fact that the words can be used in the same sentence without understanding the context in which they are given.
The answer to the "accusation" that Hitler was a vegetarian, is to ask whether a person who eats liver dumplings, caviar and ham is vegetarian?
References
[1]The Goebbels Diaries 1939-41, trans. Fred Taylor, 1982.
[2]The Psychopathic God: Adolf Hitler, Robert Waite, 1977.
[3]Life and Death of Adolf Hitler, Robert Payne, 1973.
[4]Gourmet Cooking School Cookbook, Dione Lucas.
[5]Hitler, A Study in Tyranny, Alan Bullock, 1994.
[6]The Medical Casebook of Adolf Hitler, Leonard and Renate Heston, 1979.
[7]Hitler and Vegetarianism, Roberta Kalechofsky, micahbooks.com.
[8]Adolf Hitler, John Toland, 1976.
Another useful and relevant article, Was Hitler a vegetarian?, is attributed to Roberta Kalechofsky, (writer, publisher, and president of the organisation Jews for Animal Rights) which was published in the November 1996 issue of The Animals' Agenda:
In their efforts to discredit animal rights activists, supporters of animal research periodically proclaim to the media that Adolf Hitler was a vegetarian and that the Nazis did not engage in animal research.
The implication is that these 'revelations' suggest a sinister similarity between Nazis and animal rights 'zealots' and serve as a warning that animal advocates have an anti-human agenda. But the real story about Hitler and the Nazis is miles from the myth. One legitimate response to such claims is that it doesn't matter whether Hitler was a vegetarian; as Peter Singer said, 'The fact that Hitler had a nose doesn't mean we're going to cut our noses off.'
Biographical material about Hitler include contradictions in reports about his diet. He is often described as a vegetarian who nevertheless had a special fondness for sausages and caviar, and sometimes ham. One of his biographers, Robert Payne (The Life and Death of Adolf Hitler) took exception to the view of Hitler as an ascetic, and said it was deliberately fostered by the Nazis to project an image of Hitler as pure and dedicated.
'Hitler's asceticism played an important part in the image he projected over Germany. According to the widely believed legend, he neither smoked nor drank, nor did he have anything to do with women. 'Only the first was true. He drank beer and diluted wine frequently, had a special fondness for Bavarian sausages, and kept a mistress... 'His asceticism was a fiction invented by (Nazi propagandist Joseph) Goebbels to emphasize his total dedication, his self-control, the distance that separated him from other men...' Biographer John Toland describes Hitler's early student diet as consisting of 'milk, sausage, and bread'.
Moreover, Hitler never promoted vegetarianism as a public policy for either health or moral reasons. His lack of policies and public support for vegetarianism is significant in a leader who rigorously enforced other health policies, such as anti-smoking and anti-pollution legislation, and pregnancy and birthing measures for women.
The rumor that the Nazis passed an anti-vivisection law is also filled with contradictions. No such law was passed, although the Nazis reported that such a law existed. The Nazis allegedly passed an anti-vivisection bill in 1933. Lancet, the prestigious British medical journal, reviewed the Nazis' law in 1934 and warned anti-vivisectionists not to celebrate because the Nazis' law was no different, in effect, from the British law that had been passed in 1876, which restricted some animal research, but hardly eliminated it. An enormous amount of research on animals continued to be carried out by Nazi doctors.
The evidence of Nazi experiments on animals is overwhelming. In The Dark Face of Science, author John Vyvyan summed it up correctly: 'The experiments made on prisoners were many and diverse, but they had one thing in common: all were in continuation of or complementary to, experiments on animals. 'In every instance, this antecedent scientific literature is mentioned in the evidence, and at Buchenvald and Auschwitz concentration camps, human and animal experiments were carried out simultaneously as parts of a single programme'.
vivisection-absurd.org.uk. |
