For a Democratic "United States of Europe" (1918–1951): Freemasons – Human Rights Leagues – Winston S. Churchill – Individual Citizens 3515124640, 9783515124645

Citation preview

WOLFGANG SCHMALE

For a Democratic “United States of Europe” (1918–1951) Freemasons – Human Rights Leagues – Winston S. Churchill – Individual Citizens

Geschichte Franz Steiner Verlag

SG EI – SHEI – E HI E

studien zur geschichte der europäischen integration – sgei études sur l’histoire de l’intégration européenne – ehie studies on the history of european integration – shei Herausgegeben von / Edited by / Dirigé par Jürgen Elvert In Verbindung mit / In cooperation with / En coopération avec Charles Barthel / Jan-Willem Brouwer / Eric Bussière / Antonio Costa Pinto / Desmond Dinan / Michel Dumoulin / Michael Gehler / Brian Girvin / Wolf D. Gruner / Wolfram Kaiser / Laura Kolbe / Johnny Laursen / Wilfried Loth / Piers Ludlow / Maria Grazia Melchionni / Enrique Moradiellos Garcia / Sylvain Schirmann / Antonio Varsori / Tatiana Zonova

band / volume 33

For a Democratic “United States of Europe” (1918–1951) Freemasons – Human Rights Leagues – Winston S. Churchill – Individual Citizens Wolfgang Schmale

Franz Steiner Verlag

Printing funded by the Faculty of Historical and Cultural Studies at the University of Vienna.

Bibliografische Information der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek: Die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek verzeichnet diese Publikation in der Deutschen Nationalbibliografie; detaillierte bibliografische Daten sind im Internet über abrufbar. Dieses Werk einschließlich aller seiner Teile ist urheberrechtlich geschützt. Jede Verwertung außerhalb der engen Grenzen des Urheberrechtsgesetzes ist unzulässig und strafbar. © Franz Steiner Verlag, Stuttgart 2019 Druck: Hubert & Co, Göttingen Gedruckt auf säurefreiem, alterungsbeständigem Papier. Printed in Germany. ISBN 978-3-515-12464-5 (Print) ISBN 978-3-515-12465-2 (E-Book)

CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .............................................................................. 7 PROLOGUE ................................................................................................... 9 I. INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................... 11 The Churchill Moment ............................................................................. Social History of the Idea of European Unity .......................................... European Civil Society and the Idea of European Unity ......................... Definition of “Civil Society” ........................................................... The French Prism ............................................................................. Resistance Movements ..................................................................... Civil Society and Ordinary Citizens ................................................

11 16 19 19 24 25 27

II. FREEMASONS AND THE IDEA OF EUROPE IN THE 1920S AND 1930S ..................................................................... 29 Introduction .............................................................................................. Strengths and Weaknesses of Existing Research on Masonry ................. Aspects of Masonic History ..................................................................... Masonic “United States of Europe” ......................................................... The Setting of the Case Study .......................................................... The Masonic Idea of Europe and Colonialism ................................. The League of Nations and United States of Europe ....................... Franco-German Reconciliation and Europe ..................................... The Convention of 1933 – “Statut de l’Europe de demain” ............

29 32 33 42 42 44 48 53 55

III. HUMAN RIGHTS LEAGUES AND THE IDEA OF EUROPE DURING THE INTERWAR PERIOD .................................................... 59 Introduction: French Leadership .............................................................. 59 Citizens for Human Rights and “Europe vécue” ...................................... 69 “Les Cahiers des Droits de l’Homme” (1920–1940): An International Platform for a United States of Europe .................. 80 Human Rights Leagues and the Idea of a United States of Europe ......... 86 The Concept of Civilization, Colonialism and Europe – Conclusion ..................................................................................... 106

6

Contents

IV. “MY DEAR MR. CHURCHILL …” ................................................... 125 Introduction ............................................................................................ General Characterization of the Letters to Winston Churchill in the Archive of the European Movement ..................................... Overview of Contents Using Selected Letters ....................................... Letters from Germany .................................................................... Letters from France ........................................................................ Letters from the USA ..................................................................... Letters from Other Countries ......................................................... Priorities ................................................................................................. Europe as a Civilization ................................................................. Europe as the Occident – “Saviour of the Occident” ..................... Europe – Wiping the Slate Clean after the Vitiation ..................... A Europe of Democracy and Human Rights? ................................ Conclusion .............................................................................................

125 126 129 129 133 137 138 139 139 142 148 149 154

EPILOGUE ................................................................................................. 155 SUMMARIES ............................................................................................. 165 Deutsch ................................................................................................... 165 English ................................................................................................... 168 Français .................................................................................................. 171 DOCUMENTATION ................................................................................. 175 Primary Sources: Archives ..................................................................... 175 Other Primary Sources ........................................................................... 177 Secondary Literature .............................................................................. 179 INDEX ........................................................................................................ 189

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank my university, the University of Vienna, for granting me a sabbatical from 1 October 2016 to 30 June 2017. The Fondation Maison des Sciences de l’Homme (FMSH) in Paris granted me a scholarship for October and November 2016. I am also grateful to the following archives and libraries for their excellent support: Archives of the European Union at the European University Institute, Florence; Bibliothèque de la Fondation Maison des sciences de l’homme, Paris; Bibliothèque de documentation internationale contemporaine (BDIC1), Paris-Nanterre; Archives et Bibliothèque de la Grande Loge de France, Paris (special thanks to François Rognon); Bibliothek Deutsches Historisches Institut (DHI), Paris; Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Munich; Fachbereichsbibliothek Geschichte, University of Vienna (special thanks to director Harald Tersch). I also wish to thank Catherine Horel, professor at Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne, and Falk Bretschneider, Maître de conférences à l’Ecole des hautes études en sciences sociales (EHESS), Paris. Christopher Treiblmayr, Vienna, co-head of our research project on the history of the human rights leagues 2, which also forms the foundation for this book, read the manuscript and enriched it with his critical comments. My gratitude likewise goes out to Marcus G. Patka (Jewish Museum Vienna). Stephan Stockinger revised the English text and translated chapter IV and the epilogue from German into English. Thomas Tretzmüller gave editorial support and accurately produced the layout. Both merit my special thanks. Last but not least, I am grateful to Jürgen Elvert, editor of this book series, for accepting the manuscript and to the publisher Franz Steiner Verlag, represented by Katharina Stüdemann, for the excellent co-operation.

1

2

In spring 2018, the BDIC changed its name to La Contemporaine. Bibliothèque, Archives, Musée des mondes contemporains (see http://www.lacontemporaine.fr/). I will nevertheless use “BDIC” as an abbreviation in the footnotes. For the history of the BDIC/La Contemporaine, see La Contemporaine, ed. (2017): Cent ans. De la BDIC à la contemporaine = Matériaux pour l’histoire de notre temps, No 125–126. Schmale, Wolfgang; Treiblmayr, Christopher, eds. (2017): Human Rights Leagues in Europe (1898–2016). Stuttgart.

PROLOGUE I am truly shocked by what can be considered the “official doctrine” of the European Union today, namely that European integration was the work of a scant few politicians and diplomats following the Second World War. I naturally have no intent of derogating the merits of a Charles de Gaulle, Konrad Adenauer, Altiero Spinelli, Hendrik Brugmans, Robert Schuman, Jean Monnet or Winston Spencer Churchill, to name only a few – but historically speaking, this doctrine is wrong. I call it an “official doctrine” of the European Union because the notion is explicitly stated in the solemn declaration on the occasion of the 60th anniversary of the Rome Treaty in 2017, a joint declaration of 27 EU member states (without the UK), the European Council, the European Parliament and the European Commission.1 Most officials in the European Union like to refer to the “founding fathers” while at the same time failing to give credit to the “founding mothers” as well as the many others who were in favour of unification and worked towards it as active members of European associations or simply as active citizens. This is akin to a contemporaneous “rapture of Europe” because the true originators of the idea of a united Europe – regardless of the legal form it would eventually adopt – are divested of their rights. It is my intent to reinstate these rights. These originators were “ordinary citizens”, some of them perhaps “exceptional citizens” – but at any rate, they were the type of people who form the basis of every civil society. I will return to the definition of “ordinary citizens” and “civil society” in my introduction. I hope I am making very clear what the intention of this book is: In this early phase of the 21st century, Europe – and more precisely the European Union – is in crisis, and the ordinary citizens that make up civil society are among the actors who can help to resolve this crisis. They can help because they have a historical claim to authorship, or co-authorship, of the fundamental process of European integration and unification. A reform of the European institutions and the political agenda as well as of the rules of conduct is necessary, of course, and it is what many politicians are demanding. But this alone is not sufficient. The European idea itself needs new impulses, and over the past one hundred and sixty years since the notion of a “United States of Europe” was first voiced by citizens’

1

“European unity started as the dream of a few, it became the hope of the many.” See http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2017/03/25/rome-declaration/ (accessed 13 November 2017).

10

Prologue

movements on the occasion of the revolutions of 1848 – and even somewhat earlier – such impulses have always come from the base.2 Special emphasis will be placed on the question to what extent civil society actors based their idea of a United States of Europe on democracy and human rights. As it is still too early for a synthesis of the history of civil society’s contributions to European unity and union, I was forced to consider which alternative approach to choose. The interwar period was characterized by a dense network of civil society associations and organizations. Which of them – and which actors – could rightly claim to be representative? This question remains difficult to answer. For reasons I will explain in the following introduction and expand on in the respective chapters, I ultimately selected two influential groups of activists: the Freemasons and the human rights league activists. Many of their members were also active in other associations and/or organizations, of course. And although it is impossible not to make a contribution to the history of Freemasonry and the human rights leagues in the interwar years by delving into their source material, that is not my primary goal. Instead, I hope to approach individual actors closely enough to obtain an impression that is characteristic for these citizens engaging with the idea of creating a United States of Europe. The mixture they represent in terms of social stratification, education, professional background, age, life experience, networking etc. seems characteristic for the epoch. Nevertheless, I do not claim them to be representative, since this would require statistics and systematic comparisons between different associations in regard to their social composition – a task too large for an individual researcher. The same is basically true for the postwar period from 1945/46 to the early 1950s. I have decided to take a detailed look at people who sent letters to Winston S. Churchill, the most famous and leading “Europeanist” during this brief period. To some extent, these people are characteristic for the many who joined the young European movements or at least supported them on an ideational level. If the combination of these three case studies seems a bit arbitrary at first glance, I sincerely hope the following chapters will convince the reader that it is in fact well-chosen and meaningful.

2

I provide an outline of these processes in my book “Geschichte Europas” (Europe’s History). See Schmale, Wolfgang (2000): Geschichte Europas. Vienna, ch. 5.3–5.4, p. 100–114 (early 19th century to 1933).

I. INTRODUCTION THE CHURCHILL MOMENT “My Dear Mr Churchill” is a typical salutation used by English-speaking writers – women and men from various countries – of letters addressed to Winston S. Churchill between 1946 and around 1951. Such letters were sent not only by people living in English-speaking countries, but also from France, Germany, Switzerland and other countries such as Uruguay or Cuba. People wrote in their native language, in English, or in other foreign languages they had adopted as theirs in the host countries to which they had emigrated. It was a time during which Churchill travelled to several European countries and the USA and gave dozens of speeches – frequently because honorary degrees, usually doctorates in Law, were being conferred on him, but also often at the invitation of national parliaments. One of Churchill’s speeches, namely the one given at Zurich University on 19 September 1946, became famous for its exhortation of the Europeans to build a United States of Europe.1 It was not the first time Churchill had advocated this project. I will pass over his many comments on Europe in the interwar years and during the Second World War, but in most of his speeches between 1945 and 1948, Churchill at least mentioned or in some cases even expressly detailed the concept of a United States of Europe (USE): Brussels, 16 November 1945 (speech to the joint meeting of the Senate and the Chamber)2; The Hague, 9 May 1946 (speech to the States General of the Netherlands)3; Zurich, 19 September 1946 (the aforementioned “Zurich speech”, Zurich University)4; London, 14 May 1947 (Albert Hall, United Europe meeting)5; The Hague, 7 May 1948 (Congress of 1

2 3 4 5

The history and chronology of the Zurich speech were established by Sauter, Max (1976): Churchills Schweizer Besuch 1946 und die Zürcher Rede. Herisau (Philosophical dissertation, University of Zurich). Sauter prints the spoken version (recording by Radio Zurich), which differs in some details from the version printed later in “The Sinews of Peace” (see next footnote). A third version, likewise differing from the delivered speech in some details, was circulated to the press after the speech (see Sauter, p. 77, footnote 241). See also Klos, Felix (2016): Churchill on Europe. The Untold Story of Churchill’s European Project. London – New York (Klos does not quote Sauter, so the story is less ‘untold’ than he claims …). Klos wanted to clarify Churchill’s position with regard to the Brexit debate in the UK: Brexiteers and Remainers alike claimed Churchill as support for their opinion. See Churchill, Winston S. (1948): The Sinews of Peace. Post-War Speeches, ed. by Randolph S. Churchill. London, p. 41–44. See Churchill, The Sinews of Peace, op. cit., p. 128–134. See Churchill, The Sinews of Peace, op. cit., p. 198–202. See Churchill, Winston S. (1950): Europe Unite. Speeches 1947 and 1948, ed. by Randolph S. Churchill. London, p. 77–85.

12

I. Introduction

Europe)6. In several other speeches, he did not mention the USE explicitly, instead speaking of a “united Europe”: Metz, 14 July 19467; Amsterdam, 9 May 1948 (open-air meeting)8; London, 17 November 1948 (“United Europe” exhibition, Dorland Hall)9. Nearly all of Churchill’s speeches, or at least their key messages, were disseminated by the international media. His public was international and as large as one could imagine, and the reason is clear: After the war, there was no statesman more renowned than Churchill, whose excellent speeches had always had the quality of practical acts with a deep impact on public opinion. It is no coincidence that he was awarded the Nobel Prize for Literature some years later in 1953, for his rhetoric was exceptional and could be understood by everyone. It is noteworthy that Churchill was a Freemason. This is not to say that his ideas pertaining to Europe originated exclusively in Freemasonry, but they were certainly encouraged by it as we will see below in chapter II. And although he was an avowed conservative and Christian, his speeches also reached people who held other political opinions or referred to Christianism less than he did. In the postwar years, Churchill ceaselessly attempted to foster a new European spirit of unity and collaboration, at least in the West. He (and one is tempted to say: he alone) was able to outline in a single speech the global political situation and the roles played by the different powers, the development of Europe during the early “Cold War” (the expression is not contemporaneous) and the diminishing influence of the British Empire or Commonwealth. He was historian enough to convincingly evoke the longue-durée phenomena in the postwar present, and he was a staunch and convincing democrat who stood on a foundation of solid values. One may object that he argued in favour of colonialism, and we will see in the coming chapters how the representatives of civil society dealt with the issue of democracy and colonialism. Nevertheless, Churchill’s analyses of the global political, military, economic and social situation were clear and mostly factual, and they were characterized by a pronounced fairness. In short, Churchill was unique in that he was simultaneously an intellectual, an outstanding politician, and a man whose speeches touched people of all social strata, whether they were from allied nations or from former enemies such as Germany. He became the link between ordinary citizens’ ideas of a united Europe on the one hand and the political project of a European union – or a United States of Europe, the term preferred by Churchill – on the other. There was something like a “Churchill moment”, a specific impetus, in the early years of European unification following the Second World War, and this is why it seems reasonable to me to bring together Winston Spencer Churchill and the “ordinary citizens”. The pinnacle of this Churchill moment was undeniably the Congress of Europe in The Hague in 1948 (7–10 May), a decisive and emotional event in the 6 7 8 9

See Churchill, Europe Unite, op. cit., p. 310–317. See Churchill, The Sinews of Peace, op. cit., p. 171–175. See Churchill, Europe Unite, op. cit., p. 318–321. See Churchill, Europe Unite, op. cit., p. 465–466.

The Churchill Moment

13

history of the European unification movement. The congress united representatives of European civil society as well as intellectuals and representatives of the political class, some of whom had been active in resistance movements during the Second World War or participated in one of the committees or commissions of the League of Nations, in a human rights league, or in an association or society supporting European cooperation, European unification or the idea of a United States of Europe. It provided a massive impulse for the European federalist movements and had an impact on the founding process of the Council of Europe as well. In his opening speech, Churchill aptly declared: “This is not a Movement of parties but a movement of peoples.”10 The Congress of Europe and the establishment of the European Movement International in Brussels in October 1948 evoked a broad media echo, encouraging many ordinary people to write letters to Churchill (and presumably to other politicians as well) and become activists – Europeanists – themselves. These letters, which will be examined in chapter IV, are characteristic of the late 1940s and early 1950s as a period in between the dynamics of a civil society inherited from the interwar period and the resistance movements on the one hand and the new dynamics of institutionalized European integration on the other. This is not to say that the letters to Churchill do not raise certain questions. Not all of the writers were without doubts, and some were – at least formerly – fascists. The background of the latter’s European ideas can be traced back to fascist conceptions of a European “unity”. Nevertheless, they were part of the numerous chorus that sung, after the war, the song of European unification in a European Union or a United States of Europe. In their totality, these letters illustrate very well who were the individuals wishing to be part of the European movements as active members or as supporters backing their idealism. One could say they represent the “European movement generation” of the early postwar years, with their authorship comprising teenagers going to school, university students, young people who had experienced their late youth in the war, “mature” adults, and elderly men and women. European integration has always been advanced by the many and not only by the few, though this fact has largely been forgotten in the meantime. The institutionalization of the integration process by creating “first”11 the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC), then the European Economic Community and so on all the way to the European Union has slowly but noticeably alienated citizens from the idea of Europe. It was with good reason that pro-European associations such as the European Federalists were initially sceptical regarding the path paved by the ECSC, though they did not resist the developments in a fundamentalist fashion.

10 Speech at The Hague, Congress of Europe, 7 May 1948. In: Churchill, Europe Unite, op. cit., p. 311. 11 “First” refers to those institutions that were, at least in hindsight, the forerunners of the European Union of today.

14

I. Introduction

Institutionalization relegated the pro-European civil movements to the background. They continued to exist and disseminate the idea of European unity, but the information machine created by the European Communities became stronger and appropriated public attention.12 With the economic and financial crises becoming a political crisis of the European Union in recent years, existing pro-European associations have found their way back into the public eye and new organizations such as “Pulse of Europe” have been established.13 In hindsight, Europe as the “project of an elite” was no more than an episode. The new generation of ordinary citizens marching in favour of European-Union Europe do so because they know there is much to be lost. The interwar and early postwar generations of ordinary citizens – not without exception, of course – were willing to unite Europe, and while the fundamental motives have necessarily been modified, what has not changed to this day is the fact that ordinary citizens stand up to do what is necessary when Europe is in crisis. They did so after the First World War (and of course even earlier as well, but that is not the topic of this book), they did so during both World Wars under life-threatening circumstances, they continued to do so after the Second World War, and they are doing so now. In his opening speech to the Congress of Europe in The Hague in 1948, Winston Churchill said: The Movement for European Unity must be a positive force, deriving its strength from our sense of common spiritual values. It is a dynamic expression of democratic faith based upon moral conceptions and inspired by a sense of mission. In the centre of our movement stands the idea of a Charter of Human Rights, guarded by freedom and sustained by law. 14

This statement provides an excellent summary of what organizations like the human rights leagues that were active during the interwar period believed in. At its height between the wars, the French Ligue des Droits de l’Homme had more than 180,000 members. It was a major civil society agent, and most of its members must be considered “ordinary citizens”. Like many of his other speeches, Churchill’s words in The Hague established a connection between the prewar goal of a democratic and pacifistic civil society largely composed of ordinary citizens and supporting the notion of a new Europe – one that would consist of a union or

12 See as an exemplary study Reinfeldt, Alexander (2014): Unter Ausschluss der Öffentlichkeit? Akteure und Strategien supranationaler Informationspolitik in der Gründungsphase der europäischen Integration, 1952–1972. Stuttgart. 13 See Leggewie, Claus (2017): Europa zuerst! Eine Unabhängigkeitserklärung. Berlin. Leggewie’s approach focuses on grassroots movements. In this he differs radically from other studies that prefer a view from above: Marcowitz, Reiner; Wilkens, Andreas, eds. (2014): Une “Europe des citoyens”. Société civile et identité européenne de 1945 à nos jours. Bern. 14 Churchill, Europe Unite, op. cit., p. 312. A French version of the speech was also distributed to the press on 7 May 1948 (after 3.30 p.m.): This material was collected by Robert Aron, one of the French participants, who later donated his congress papers to the Bibliothèque de Documentation Internationale Contemporaine (hereafter BDIC), Paris-Nanterre in December 1955. For the imprint of Churchill’s speech in French, see Fonds Congrès de l’Europe (1948), BDIC, F delta res 0114.

The Churchill Moment

15

“United States” of democratic European countries respecting basic human rights – and the postwar civil society and governments. That being said, this book focuses on a small number of case studies that help to round out our knowledge on who these ordinary citizens were that formed the basis of civil society in regard to European unification and what role they played in Europeanism. For the interwar years, I have chosen the cases of the Freemasons on the one hand and the human rights leagues on the other. Both were intertwined with each other and combined national and international structures and elements extending far beyond geographic Europe. The reason for this choice is that prewar and interwar societies were conducive to a rich landscape of leagues, associations, societies, committees etc. that were connected in national, transnational and international frameworks. The establishment of the League of Nations proved to be propitious for this kind of organized civil society – though the term “civil society” should not be interpreted as signifying a societal sector separated from or flatly opposed to politics. Active members of leagues, committees, societies and the like often appear to have been active politicians as well. This fact does not change the civil society character of these organizations, however, and Freemasons and human rights league activists thus constitute an excellent way of opening doors to understanding the civil society during the interwar period. The third, postwar case study deals with the many people who wrote letters to Churchill. For the most part, they were ordinary citizens acting outside of any organizational framework at the time they penned their letters. There was also no organizational link or network between them individually like there was in the case of Freemasonry and human rights activists. What they did have in common was a conviction – namely that Europe should unite – and a leading personality they believed in: Winston S. Churchill. Some of them were of course involved in certain civil society organizations or had applied to join one or the other, but I have chosen to study them as individuals since that is what they appear as in their letters. As mentioned above, these writers of letters to Churchill represent quite aptly the generation in which the emerging European movements 15 found active members and supporters of their ideas. They were the door openers to this field of recruitment. Compared to the more or less illustrious assembly at the Congress of Europe in The Hague, our letter writers were also more frequently members of the lower social classes. Churchill himself sketched a picture of the assembly: This Congress has brought together leaders of thought and action from all the free countries of Europe. Statesmen of all political parties, leading figures from all the Churches, eminent writers, leaders of the professions, lawyers, chiefs of industry and prominent trade-unionists

15 European overview of European Movements: Pistone, Sergio, ed. (1996): I Movimenti per l’Unità Europea 1954–1969. Atti del Convegno Internazionale, Genova, 5–7 novembre 1992. Pavia.

16

I. Introduction are gathered here. In fact a representative grouping of the most essential elements in the political, industrial, cultural and spiritual life of Europe is now assembled in this ancient hall. 16

Most of the letter writers definitely did not belong to these classes, and the same can be said about prewar Europeanists. Organizations or associations such as human rights leagues, Freemasons, pacifists and others were backed by a massive base in various countries. Their members numbered in the tens of thousands or even more than a hundred thousand besides the few well-known representatives. One could nevertheless argue that this still did not place them outside of the realm of the social elites; I will revisit this aspect in more detail in the respective chapters. SOCIAL HISTORY OF THE IDEA OF EUROPEAN UNITY “Civil society”, and even more so “ordinary citizens”, paved the way for a “social history of the idea of European unity”. Since the medieval period, important figureheads like Dante Alighieri (“De Monarchia”, early 14th century), Erasmus of Rotterdam (“Querela Pacis”, early 16th century), Sully (“Grand Design”, early 17th century), Abbé de Saint-Pierre (“Paix perpétuelle”, early 18th century), Rousseau (new edition of de Saint-Pierre’s treaty, mid-18th century) and Kant (“Perpetual Peace”, late 18th century), Henri de Saint-Simon (European monarchical state, early 19th century), Victor Hugo (concept of fraternal nations, mid-19th century), Richard Nikolaus von Coudenhove-Kalergi (“Pan-Europe”, interwar years), Jean Monnet (institutional integration, interwar and postwar period) and many others have been studied copiously in regard to their contributions to the politicalphilosophical notion of European unity.17 The idea of seeking a broader social base for such a unified Europe was first explored by scholars and especially historians during the Second World War. In a first phase, which can be distinguished from the second phase starting around fifteen years ago, scholars enlarged the group of studied authors writing about Europe and its unification. Heinz Gollwitzer conducted research on the notion and imagination of Europe in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth century during 16 Churchill, Europe Unite, op. cit., p. 311. The social stratification of national delegations to the Congress is examined in Guieu, Jean-Michel; Le Dréau, Christophe, eds. (2009): Le “Congrès de l’Europe” à la Haye (1948–2008). Brussels: French delegation, studied by Bernard Lachaise, p. 151–167, especially p. 155; British delegation, studied by Christophe Le Dréau, p. 169–185; Belgian delegation, studied by Geneviève Duchenne, p. 187–197; Dutch delegation, studied by Annemarie Van Heerikhuizen, p. 199–209; Italian delegation, studied by Simone Paoli, p. 211–222; Greek delegation, studied by Alexandra Patrikiou, p. 223–232; Hungarian delegation, studied by Gergely Fejérdy, p. 233–242. The question of “elites” is posed by Alexander Reinfeldt, p. 287–298. 17 The main authors of plans for Europe are presented in Böttcher, Winfried, ed. (2014): Klassiker des europäischen Denkens. Friedens- und Europavorstellungen aus 700 Jahren europäischer Kulturgeschichte. Baden-Baden. See also Hewitson, Mark; D’Auria, Matthew, eds. (2012): Europe in Crisis. Intellectuals and the European Idea, 1917–1957. New York.

Social History of the Idea of European Unity

17

the Second World War, and the resulting book on “Europabild und Europagedanke” was first published in Munich in 1951.18 Gollwitzer took into consideration not only the figureheads of the epoch, but also included a number of second-line authors. In the 1960s, Walter Lipgens set out to investigate the history of resistance groups in Europe. He published hundreds of documents showing the richness and inveteracy of the idea of European unity in various political, religious and ideological milieus. The four volumes “Documents on the History of European Integration” (published 1985–1991, all documents translated into English or printed in their original English versions) impressively present the sizeable and diverse social base that Europe was intellectually built upon after the war. Lipgens died while editing this enormous collection of records (ca. 750 documents dating from 1939 to 1950), and it was Wilfried Loth who eventually completed the editorial work in 1991.19 A few years later in 1995, a valuable synthesis was provided by Michel Dumoulin in “Plans des temps de guerre pour l’Europe d’après-guerre 1940–1947”20. This collection of research articles includes the ideas of Nazis and their collaborators on Europe. In general, the participation and impact of extreme right-wing and fascist groups should not be underestimated – as shown in the studies by Bernard Bruneteau (“Les ‘collabos’ de l’Europe nouvelle”)21 and Robert Grunert22, for example. While this aspect has been a subject of intensive research for only around thirty years, Lipgens had already collected and published such documents as well. In the meantime, several synthetic studies have also been published that focus on individual participants, groups (interest groups, professional groups, associations) and networks. Among these, one might highlight (in chronological order) Gérard Bossuat’s “Inventer l’Europe. Histoire nouvelle des groupes d’influence et des acteurs de l’unité européenne” (2003)23, Olivier Dard and Étienne Deschamps’s “Les relèves en Europe d’un après-guerre à l’autre” (2005)24, JeanMichel Guieu and Christophe Le Dréau’s “Le ‘Congrès de l’Europe’ à La Haye (1948–2008)” (2009)25 and Veronika Heyde’s “De l’esprit de la Résistance 18 Gollwitzer, Heinz (1951): Europabild und Europagedanke. Munich. 19 Lipgens, Walter; Loth, Wilfried, eds. (1985–1991): Documents on the History of European Integration, 4 vols. Berlin. Vols. 1 (1985) and 2 (1986) cover 1939–1945, vols. 3 (1988) and 4 (1991) cover 1945–1950. 20 Dumoulin, Michel, ed. (1995): Plans des temps de guerre pour l’Europe d’après-guerre, 1940–1947 / Wartime Plans for Postwar Europe, 1940–1947. Actes du colloque de Bruxelles 12–14 mai 1993. Baden-Baden – Brussels. 21 Bruneteau, Bernard (2016): Les “collabos” de l’Europe nouvelle. Paris. 22 Grunert, Robert (2012): Der Europagedanke westeuropäischer faschistischer Bewegungen 1940–1945. Paderborn. 23 Bossuat, Gérard, ed. (2003): Inventer l’Europe. Histoire nouvelle des groupes d’influence et des acteurs de l’unité européenne. Avec la collaboration de Georges Saunier. Brussels. 24 Dard, Olivier; Deschamps, Étienne, eds. (2008): Les relèves en Europe d’un après-guerre à l’autre. Racines, réseaux, projets et postérités, 2nd ed. Brussels (1st ed. 2005). This collection of articles covers a wide range of conceptions of Europe from right-wing to left-wing political orientations, from religious to non-religious approaches, etc. 25 Guieu/Le Dréau, eds., Le “Congrès de l’Europe” à la Haye, op. cit.

18

I. Introduction

jusqu’à l’idée de l’Europe. Projets européens et américains pour l’Europe de l’après-guerre (1940–1950)” (2010).26 The idea of a United States of Europe as discussed among labour movements was studied by Willy Buschak (2014).27 Some authors like Wolfram Kaiser, Brigitte Leucht and Morten Rasmussen (2009)28 or Kaiser, Leucht and Michael Gehler in “Transnational Networks in Regional Integration” (2010)29 have focused specifically on networks of Europeanists. Christina Norwig studied the European Youth Campaign in the 1950s, which allowed her to enlarge the social base of the European idea.30 Other scholars have studied pro-European movements and groups of interest in individual countries in depth. I will list but a few of these, again in chronological order: Heinz Duchhardt and Małgorzata Morawiec’s “Vision Europa” (2003) dealing with German and Polish Europeanists in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries31; Anita Ziegerhofer’s “Botschafter Europas. Richard Nikolaus Coudenhove-Kalergi und die Paneuropa-Bewegung in den zwanziger und dreißiger Jahren” (2004)32; Vanessa Conze’s “Das Europa der Deutschen” (2005)33; and Geneviève Duchenne’s “L’européisme dans la Belgique de l’entre-deux-guerres (1919– 1939)” (2008)34. Finally, a ground-breaking effort was undertaken by Gabriele Clemens with her study examining pro-European advertising films.35 Pacifists and their movements, League of Nations associations, European federalist movements, and the Europeanism of political parties of all colours and ideological orientations have also been examined. The emergence of various 26 Heyde, Veronika (2010): De l’esprit de la Résistance jusqu’à l’idée de l’Europe. Projets européens et américains pour l’Europe de l’après-guerre (1940–1950). Brussels. In addition, the reader may consult the following book: Henrich-Franke, Christian, ed. (2014): Die “Schaffung” Europas in der Zwischenkriegszeit. Politische, wirtschaftliche und gesellschaftliche Konstruktionen eines vereinten Europas. Berlin. 27 Buschak, Willy (2014): Die Vereinigten Staaten von Europa sind unser Ziel. Arbeiterbewegung und Europa im frühen 20. Jahrhundert. Essen. 28 Leucht, Brigitte; Rasmussen, Morten; Kaiser, Wolfram, eds. (2009): The History of the European Union. Origins of a Trans- and Supranational Polity 1950–72. New York – London. 29 Leucht, Brigitte; Gehler, Michael; Kaiser, Wolfram, eds. (2010): Transnational Networks in Regional Integration. Governing Europe 1945–83. New York. 30 Norwig, Christina (2016): Die erste europäische Generation. Europakonstruktionen in der Europäischen Jugendkampagne, 1951–1958. Göttingen. 31 Duchhardt, Heinz; Morawiec, Małgorzata, eds. (2003): Vision Europa. Deutsche und polnische Föderationspläne des 19. und frühen 20. Jahrhunderts. Mainz. 32 Ziegerhofer-Prettenthaler, Anita (2004): Botschafter Europas. Richard Nikolaus CoudenhoveKalergi und die Paneuropa-Bewegung in den zwanziger und dreißiger Jahren. Vienna. 33 Conze, Vanessa (2005): Das Europa der Deutschen. Ideen von Europa in Deutschland zwischen Reichstradition und Westorientierung (1920–1970). Munich. See also Conze, Vanessa (2004): Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi. Umstrittener Visionär Europas. Gleichen (brief biography for ‘popular’ use). 34 Duchenne, Geneviève (2008): Esquisses d’une Europe nouvelle. L’européisme dans la Belgique de l’entre-deux-guerres (1919–1939). Brussels. 35 Clemens, Gabriele, ed. (2016): Werben für Europa. Die mediale Konstruktion europäischer Identität durch Europafilme. Paderborn.

European Civil Society and the Idea of European Unity

19

European movements in the period since the end of the Second World War has inspired a number of scholars to study this Europe “from below”. Paolo Caraffini tellingly entitled his 2008 book on the subject of the “Consiglio italiano del movimento Europeo” from 1948 to 1985 “Costruire l’Europa del basso” (Building Europe From Below).36 All of these works together form a rich spectrum to which I hope to add the perspective of “civil society” and “ordinary citizens”. Naturally, this approach overlaps with previous studies – but not in relation to the specific case studies on the Masons, human rights leagues and writers of letters to Churchill, nor in the aspect of its unique viewpoint. EUROPEAN CIVIL SOCIETY AND THE IDEA OF EUROPEAN UNITY Definition of “Civil Society” The rise of civil society is commonly placed in the eighteenth century in terms of both theory and practice.37 The idea of dissociating state and society grew slowly from its beginnings in the seventeenth century, but was apparently quite well 36 Caraffini, Paolo (2008): Costruire l’Europa dal basso. Il ruolo del Consiglio italiano del movimento europeo (1948–1985). Bologna. 37 The following 12 paragraphs are partially identical to Schmale, Wolfgang; Treiblmayr, Christopher: Human Rights Leagues and Civil Society (1898 – ca. 1970s). In: Historische Mitteilungen 27 (2015), p. 186–208, here p. 199–201 (the author of this part of the article being Wolfgang Schmale). The historical draft is based specifically on: Adloff, Frank (2005): Zivilgesellschaft. Theorie und politische Praxis. Frankfurt am Main – New York. Bauerkämper, Arnd, ed. (2003): Die Praxis der Zivilgesellschaft. Akteure, Handeln und Strukturen im internationalen Vergleich. Frankfurt am Main – New York. Becker, Marvin B. (1994): The Emergence of Civil Society in the Eighteenth Century. A Privileged Moment in the History of England, Scotland, and France. Bloomington. Bermeo, Nancy; Nord, Philip, eds. (2000): Civil Society before Democracy. Lessons from Nineteenth-Century Europe. Boston. Colás, Alejandro (2013): International Civil Society. Social Movements in World Politics. Hoboken. Davies, Thomas (2013): NGOs. A New History of Transnational Civil Society. London. Edwards, Michael, ed. (2011): The Oxford Handbook of Civil Society. Oxford. Eyffinger, Arthur (1999): The 1899 Hague Peace Conference. ‘The Parliament of Man, the Federation of the World’. The Hague – London – Boston. Geremek, Bronisław; National Humanities Center, eds. (1992): The Idea of a Civil Society. National Humanities Center Conference. Research Triangle Park, NC. Hall, John A., ed. (1995): Civil Society. Theory, History, Comparison. Cambridge. Hoffmann, Stefan-Ludwig (2006): Civil society, 1750–1914. Basingstoke, Hampshire. Jessen, Ralph; Reichardt, Sven; Klein, Ansgar, eds. (2004): Zivilgesellschaft als Geschichte. Studien zum 19. und 20. Jahrhundert. Wiesbaden. Keane, John, ed. (1988): Civil Society and the State. New European Perspectives. London. Linklater, Andrew (1982): Men and Citizens in the Theory of International Relations. London. Schwelling, Birgit, ed. (2012): Reconciliation, Civil Society, and the Politics of Memory. Transnational Initiatives in the 20 th and 21st Century. Bielefeld. Seligman, Adam B. (1995): The Idea of Civil Society. Princeton, NJ. For further bibliographical details, see the quoted article by Schmale/Treiblmayr.

20

I. Introduction

developed by the middle of the eighteenth century and eventually enabled Adam Ferguson to publish his famous “Essay on the History of Civil Society” in 1767.38 One may rightfully doubt, however, that Ferguson’s notion of “civil society” was identical to what we think of when using the term today. On the one hand – and indeed to this day – civil society is a synonym for “bourgeois society”, the new societal type that achieved hegemonic status in the nineteenth century. This notion of civil society is based on the historical fact that the bourgeois was first and foremost a homo oeconomicus. This specific quality of the bourgeoisie played a major role in the social revolutions of the late eighteenth century, with Karl Marx being the first to emphasize this relationship. Historians still maintain the importance of the interrelation between civil society and the economy of the bourgeois society. Others trace the origin of the concept of civil society back to Aristotle’s notion of “politiki koinonia”, which regained popularity in the Late Middle Ages when Aristotle was translated into Latin and other vernacular languages. Most scholars writing on civil society refer to a long list of thinkers including John Locke, Montesquieu, Adam Ferguson, Adam Smith, Immanuel Kant, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, Karl Marx, Alexis de Tocqueville, Antonio Gramsci and others – not to mention the controversial debates of the past decades. Today, “civil society” is an all-encompassing notion appearing to cover all organized and structured societal activities that are non-governmental and can be subsumed under the notion of participative democracy. This type of civil society is characterized by its globalized nature. In historical hindsight, one may of course ask whether this is a new aspect or not. The bourgeois society and economy are linked to the period of globalization taking place during the late eighteenth and early nineteenth century. According to Manuel Castells, the network society is the agent of globalization during this period.39 Anti-slavery and abolition societies of the late eighteenth century were the first associations that can be regarded as organizational expressions of civil society. The fact that such associations came into being in the period of the Atlantic Revolutions can be explained by the new historic constellation owed precisely to these revolutions of society and state occurring in North America and France. This new constellation was characterized by a systemic relationship between the rule of law, humanitarianism and political participation by the people. Neither the American nor the French Revolution created constitutional institutions that could assume responsibility for the tasks resulting from this systemic constellation. The best example to illustrate this issue is the anti-slavery movement. It originated in England, initially driven by individual activists and later structured through the establishment of associations on both sides of the Atlantic. Jacques Pierre Brissot de Warville transferred the idea to France and co-founded the 38 Becker, Emergence, op. cit., p. XI, on Ferguson. 39 Castells, Manuel (1996): The Information Age: Economy, Society and Culture. 2 nd ed., Oxford.

European Civil Society and the Idea of European Unity

21

Société des Amis des Noirs in 1788. Together with Nicolas de Condorcet, the society’s president in 1789, he attempted to have slavery abolished with the help of the “cahiers de doléances” through which the French population prepared the forthcoming États-généraux in Versailles. Members of the Société who became deputies to these Estates General, which were eventually transformed into the National Assembly, were involved in the enactment of a law prohibiting slavery. The English, American and French anti-slavery and abolition societies formed a loose network, and they can be considered a structured and organized expression of the arising civil society. These organizations promoted the abolition of slavery throughout the nineteenth century and contributed to the formulation of international anti-slavery laws. The second origin of structured and organized civil society are the women’s associations created in France between 1789 and 1794. Many of these associations, though not all of them, promoted women’s political and fundamental rights. Despite being prohibited in 1794, they formed the historic model for the women’s movements and associations during the revolution of 1848 and in the Paris Commune of 1871. The most enduring of these associations were the National Society for Women’s Suffrage founded in 1867 and the Société du Suffrage des Femmes established in 1883 – not to mention various others in many European countries. Women’s clubs or societies were even to be found in the Balkans: Their main purpose was to teach women how to be a good wife and mother, but their work also comprised a strong nationalist element. These clubs were thus by no means apolitical – but were they part of a civil society, as some scholars suggest?40 Women likewise played an important role in Freemasonry, human rights leagues, pacifist movements, League of Nations associations and so forth – although Freemasonry nevertheless maintained its fraternity character in many regards. Women also wrote letters to Churchill. This is to say that the notion of civil society encompasses female activists as a condition for its definition. The dismantling of imperialism and the nationalist state impeded the juridification and humanization of international relations, which also meant a setback for the national societies. Most of the peace and internationalist movements emerging as early as 1815 – one example being the New York Peace Society founded by the New York tradesman David L. Dodge in 1815 – can thus be viewed as part of the international civil society. The first international peace conferences were held in London in 1843, in Brussels in 1848, and in Paris in 1849, the latter with a famous allocution by Victor Hugo that was sometimes still quoted in letters to Churchill a hundred years later. The International League for Peace and Freedom organized a congress in Geneva in 1867 with more than 6,000 attendants, which shows how large the active base of civil society had become by that time. Freemasons had contributed to the establishment of this new peace association, which was strongly committed to the idea of a United States of Europe based on peace, liberty, justice 40 Some of the articles in Hildermeier, Manfred; Kocka, Jürgen; Conrad, Christoph, eds. (2000): Europäische Zivilgesellschaft in Ost und West. Begriff, Geschichte, Chancen. Frankfurt am Main – New York, seem to suggest such a broad interpretation of “civil society”.

22

I. Introduction

and democracy.41 The interdependency between peace and democracy was generally seen as essential.42 I will not enumerate all the developments relating to civil society during the nineteenth century. As mentioned previously in this introduction, I have decided to investigate Freemasonry more closely. To specialists in Masonic history, the constructive role Freemasons played in the establishment of republics and the democratization of society in Europe and elsewhere is evident. This is especially true in regard to the second half of the nineteenth and the first half of the twentieth century, as well as concerning the “Latin” countries. The European and international relations of the Freemasons will be studied in the second chapter, so I will not discuss them any further here. One of the most important events in the development of modern civil society was the foundation of the Ligue pour la Défense des Droits de l’Homme et du Citoyen in France in 1898. With the establishment of this organization, senator Ludovic Trarieux and others reacted to the Dreyfus affair and the extreme rightwing League of Patriots and League of Anti-Semites. The French League for Human Rights encouraged the foundation of more than 20 similar leagues throughout Europe starting in the early twentieth century and continuing through the interwar period. These human rights leagues will be analysed in the third chapter. Freemasons and human rights activists shared networks that also included pacifists and, after the establishment of the League of Nations, the League of Nations associations. The ties between all these leagues, associations and other civil society organizations opposing anti-Semitism, racism and other phenomena were very close. The normal manner of organization generally encompassed three levels: local chapters, a central national organization (e.g. National Executive Committee, Board, Federal Council or similar) and a European or international umbrella organization. When looking closer at the members at the individual levels, an unwritten rule becomes apparent: The respective central national organization assembled distin41 See (among others) the following syntheses: Bariéty, Jacques, ed. (1987): Mouvements et initiatives de paix dans la politique internationale / Peace Movements and Initiatives in International Policy / Friedens-Bewegungen und -Anregungen in der internationalen Politik. 1867–1928. Actes du colloque tenu à Stuttgart 29–30 août 1985. Bern. Petricioli, Marta; Cherubini, Donatella; Anteghini, Alessandra, eds. (2004): Les Etats-Unis d’Europe. Un projet pacifiste / The United States of Europe. A Pacifist Project. Bern. Petricioli, Marta; Cherubini, Donatella, eds. (2007): Pour la paix en Europe. Institutions et société civile dans l’entre-deuxguerres. Brussels. With a stronger focus on Southern European countries: Tavares Ribeiro, Maria Manuela; Freitas Valente, Isabel; Rollo, Maria Fernanda, eds. (2014): Pela paz! For peace! Pour la paix! (1849–1939). Brussels. 42 With regard to the entire 20th century, see Dülffer, Jost; Niedhart, Gottfried, eds. (2011): Frieden durch Demokratie? Genese, Wirkung und Kritik eines Deutungsmusters. Essen. See also Wieviorka, Olivier; Romijn, Peter; Kott, Sandrine; Hoffmann, Stefan-Ludwig, eds. (2016): Seeking Peace in the Wake of War. Europe, 1943–1947. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press (NIOD Studies on War, Holocaust and Genocide, 2).

European Civil Society and the Idea of European Unity

23

guished figureheads. This seems logical since these people were charged, for instance, with lobbying the government over the general concerns of the association and its members as well as with maintaining international relations. They had to travel abroad, deliver speeches and write a great many letters or even treatises on specific subjects. It was their job to organize annual conventions and regular business meetings of the respective board and to handle the administration of their organizations. This often also meant they had to manage staff, and thus had to deal with employment or labour laws and potential conflicts arising from them. We will see how Freemasons and human rights leagues organized the flux of information and knowledge within their specific obedience or league. This required a certain number of educated people who were able to meaningfully organize the masses of incoming information and provide the local chapters with substantial content. The majority of the members were ordinary people. Freemasons numbered in the tens of thousands, human rights leagues and pacifists in the thousands, tens of thousands or even, in France, hundreds of thousands. As stated above, civil society comprises – for historical reasons – those citizens who advocate human and civil rights as well as a constitutional state where the rule of law reigns supreme. The legal form of this state can vary, and the understanding of “democracy” obviously evolved continually from the French Revolution until 1945, when women’s suffrage was introduced across Europe, and continues to do so to this day. But the basic definition applies throughout the entire period: Ordinary citizens are those people who subscribe to the fundamental values of the rule of law along with human and civil rights, who live out their conviction in their daily lives and eventually participate in some form of collective supporting the peaceful pursuit of their ideals. It is not necessary for them to be famous or rich or belong to the upper classes. Men and women with firm convictions exist in every social standing, and ordinary people can accomplish outstanding things – both good and bad.43 A hallmark of civil society organizations is that they involve both men and women alike. This applies to Masons (albeit with some restrictions, see chapter II), human rights leagues, pacifists, League of Nations associations, “think tanks” such as the Mayrisch circle during the interwar period, and others. In this they differ from political parties, parliaments and other types of collectives that were – and continue to be – predominantly male. This is not to say that nothing has changed in this regard, of course. Research on the idea of a European Union or United States of Europe during the interwar period has generally focused on specific associations like the PanEuropean Union of Count Richard von Coudenhove-Kalergi.44 But the concept occupied the thoughts of tens or even hundreds of thousands of individuals: The 43 For the “bad”, see the seminal study by Browning, Christopher R. (1992): Ordinary Men. Reserve Police Battalion 101 and the Final Solution in Poland. New York. 44 See, in addition to the aforementioned publication: Hewitson, Mark (2012): The United States of Europe. The European Question in the 1920s. In: Hewitson/D’Auria, eds.: Europe in Crisis, op. cit., p. 15–34.

24

I. Introduction

first half of the twentieth century featured a rich landscape of all kinds of associations including pacifists, youth organizations, Freemasons, human rights leagues, women’s associations and many more, all of which seem to have asked themselves – and posed to the public – the question how to pacify and unite Europe. Not all of these collectives can be classified as being part of civil society, however. The link between fundamental and human rights, democracy, rule of law, humanitarianism and other values on the one hand and “civil society” on the other appears essential in my eyes. It allows us to make a clear distinction between the activists described above and the many other (ordinary) citizens in nearly every European country who believed in a “new European order” under the leadership of Nazi Germany. Not all of them were staunch Nazis or fascists, or even hardliners in favour of collaborating with Hitler. They simply believed that European unification or a political order for Europe required, after the failure of the League of Nations, a dominant power that could manage it.45 These people are not included in this book’s concept of civil society. Some appear among the writers of letters to Churchill, however, and I intentionally did not exclude them from my analysis so as not to produce too “clean” an impression of the spectrum of people’s intentions. Since the second half of the nineteenth century at least, the idea of a united Europe – or even of a world union or global state – has been a close neighbour to the legal, constitutional and democratic convictions of civil society. I do not wish to plead an exaggerated interpretation, but it seems to me that since that time, the idea of European unity or unification has been part of the core principles for which civil society stands. The distinction I have made above is therefore crucial, for the notion of a united Europe has likewise been held by a great many people who were not democrats or defenders of human rights. To put it another way, being in favour of a united Europe does not automatically make someone a member of civil society. The French Prism Immediately after World War I, authoritarian regimes and dictatorships began to spread throughout Europe. France soon began to function as a platform for many of the associations constituting European civil society, and by the late 1930s it had become the primary destination for people exiled from their respective countries. Emigrants founded innumerable new associations that interwove with existing organizations. One might say that for a few years during the interwar period – before the outbreak of the Second World War disrupted the entire continent – France, and especially Paris, was the site of the establishment and flourishing of a truly European civil society. This is the “French prism” through which we must conduct our examination. 45 See Heyde, De l’esprit de la Résistance, op. cit., part I, ch. 1.

European Civil Society and the Idea of European Unity

25

The survival of Europe was viewed by civil society organizations not merely as a political and economic problem, but as one of civilization itself. France continued to claim for itself the leadership in European or Western civilization, and the European democratic civil society largely acknowledged and supported this claim. The United Kingdom, however, was drifting away from the continent in this regard. While there were still strong ties to the continental civil society, many aspects differed significantly: The British civil society advocated human rights, but it did not join the International League of Human Rights founded in 1922 (see chapter III). The British Freemasons became the largest Masonic group in Europe measured by membership, but they did not participate in initiatives promoting the pacification and unification of Europe launched by the French and some German Masons. For these reasons, I have chosen France as the central region for my research on the interwar period. We will see in the following chapters that the French civilization model was largely accepted on the continent and served as a reference point. This continued or became the case again after the Second World War when France became one of the driving forces of European unification. However, many scholars today interpret the role adopted by France in the unification process as that of a hegemon.46 Resistance Movements For the most part, the resistance movements existing during the Second World War can be subsumed under the label of civil society. That being said, one naturally cannot assert that all resistance fighters were pure democrats, since their ideologies ranged from communism all the way to aristocratic or elitist concepts of a Christian class society. They were united by the fight against the most inhuman regime that Europe has ever known47: Leading members of the resistance of nine countries met in Geneva in the flat of Mr. Visser ’t Hooft (1900–1985), the first secretary general (since 1938) of the World Council of Churches, in the spring of 1944 to elaborate principles for a federal European union.48 After the war, the influence of the resistance movements on policies seems to have been modest, though this is still a matter of debate: Mikael Rask Madsen emphasizes the role played by resistance members for the human rights protection system elaborated by the Council of Europe.49 46 See Siedentop, Larry (2000): Democracy in Europe. London. Patel, Kiran Klaus (2018): Projekt Europa. Eine kritische Geschichte. Munich, ch. VIII and passim. 47 Walter Lipgens has extensively studied the resistance movements’ plans for European unity. Heyde, L’esprit de la Résistance, op. cit., part I, ch. 2 (“L’Idée européenne dans la Résistance”) returns to the debate in the light of more recent research literature. 48 See on this and on the historical context Schmale, Geschichte Europas, op. cit., ch. 5.7, p. 129–136. 49 On former resistance members and their role in the European youth movement in 1951–1958, see Norwig, Erste europäische Generation, op. cit., p. 10. On the Council of Europe, see Madsen, Mikael Rask (2011): ‘Legal Diplomacy’. Law, Politics, and the Genesis of Postwar

26

I. Introduction

This lack of influence was of course partly due to the fact that many resistance fighters had died or been murdered. In very general terms, the prewar civil society was largely destroyed by Nazi occupation and the war. Structures were broken up, and many people were either killed or went underground or into exile. Civil society was forced to reorganize or start anew under changed conditions after the war, but things would never be the same as before. With the exception of communist resistance and the communist parties, the other resistance groups in the various countries – with the exception of the “partito d’azione” in Italy – did not change their nature into that of a political party. To measure the likely impact of former resistance fighters on the beginning process of European integration, one must delve into individual biographies. Some former resistance members participated in the Congress of Europe in The Hague in 1948, some joined the new European federalist movements, some joined Christian democratic, social democratic or liberal parties, and some assumed government offices. This has led most scholars to conclude that the project of European integration was a project of the elites.50 We would be well advised, however, to change our point of view in this regard and consider Europeanists first of all as individuals and ordinary citizens who, in pursuit of their convictions, created or joined existing structures such as civil society associations, parliaments or governments, freethinkers like the Monists and Masons, resistance movements, European unification movements, human rights leagues – and not infrequently even several such organizations or associations. This applies primarily to the interwar period, but also to postwar Europe. Having survived the war, Europeanists did not change their fundamental convictions and continued to champion them wherever they went on to be active. To focus on civil society is not the same as to analyse the history of the idea of European unification, however. The latter certainly constitutes a large and broad field of study, encompassing monographs and treatises published by hundreds of authors as well as newspapers and other mass media such as the “Wochenschauen”, which contributed significantly to the European unity discourse during the twentieth century – as Florian Greiner51, Eugen Pfister52 and other scholars have shown. But the aim of this book is not to provide a synthesis of all these ideas; instead, it sets out to examine the driving forces of Europeanism in civil society by way of individual case studies.

European Human Rights. In: Hoffmann, Stefan-Ludwig (ed.): Human Rights in the Twentieth Century. Cambridge, p. 62–81, here p. 70 (on Pierre-Henri Teitgen). 50 All of these aspects are summarized in Heyde, L’esprit de la Résistance, op. cit., part IV, ch. 1.I. 51 Greiner, Florian (2014): Wege nach Europa. Deutungen eines imaginierten Kontinents in deutschen, britischen und amerikanischen Printmedien, 1914–1945. Göttingen. 52 Pfister, Eugen (2014): Europa im Bild. Imaginationen Europas in Wochenschauen in Deutschland, Frankreich, Großbritannien und Österreich 1948–1959. Göttingen.

European Civil Society and the Idea of European Unity

27

Civil Society and Ordinary Citizens To conclude this introduction, I will summarize the key aspects of the concepts of civil society and ordinary citizens as they are used in this book. “Civil society” is more than non-governmental forms of organization; it is linked to specific convictions that are among the main characteristics of a democratic society. Despite the fact that the concepts of human rights and democracy have evolved significantly since the age of the American and French Revolutions, this connection to fundamental democratic values is and must remain a criterion of differentiation with regard to the various non-governmental organizations that promoted nationalism or motherhood or pursued exclusively charitable goals. Historical research has the tendency to enlarge the concept of civil society too much. “Ordinary citizens” are those people, men and women, who subscribe to the fundamental values of the rule of law, human and civil rights, political participation of the people, humanitarianism, peace and respect for human dignity; they live out their conviction in their daily lives and eventually participate in some form of organized association that peacefully promotes these ideals. This is essentially democratic behaviour. Ordinary citizens transcend national boundaries in terms of their horizon of thinking, and they often cross those borders physically as well. Their thinking is transnational, European, and often global, and men and women ideally participate equally in activities. Sociologically, they belong to various classes or strata, obtaining their standing not from their station in life but from their convictions and their willingness to fight for their ideals. “Civil society” thus also specifically refers to the network created by ordinary citizens through the linking of their individual and collective activities serving the general principles listed above. Non-governmental associations, organizations and the like are part of this network and establish the links. The organizational base supports the flow and transfer of knowledge as well as the effectiveness of the various activities. There are usually figureheads, and the larger an association or organization becomes, the more hierarchical levels are implemented within it. Civil society ends where such inevitable hierarchies become club absolutism, since by definition it is closely linked to human rights and democracy. Organizing the flow of knowledge is among the most challenging tasks of civil society organizations. I will be devoting special attention to this aspect during the case studies, as the effectiveness of such organizations heavily depends on it.

II. FREEMASONS AND THE IDEA OF EUROPE IN THE 1920S AND 1930S INTRODUCTION A large number of monarchs and princes from the eighteenth to the twentieth century were Freemasons. In the nineteenth century, leading politicians such as Count Andrássy, Simon Bolívar, Count Cavour, Giuseppe Garibaldi, Léon Gambetta and many others were also Masonic brothers. One could likewise list many important politicians for the interwar period.1 In Great Britain, these included Winston Spencer Churchill, King George VI, Arthur Greenwood, Sir Arthur Henry McMahon, Henry Herbert Stevens and Sir Reginald Tower; in France – Charles Bernardin, Léon Bourgeois, Aristide Briand, Paul Doumer, Felix Éboué, Marshall Joffre and Maurice Monier; in Germany – Thomas Dehler, Wilhelm Leuschner, Reinhold Maier, Carl von Ossietzky, Hjalmar Schacht, Gustav Stresemann and Alfred von Tirpitz; in Austria – Count Coudenhove-Kalergi, Alfred Hermann Fried and Julius Tandler; in Hungary – Eugen Balogh, Gustav Gratz and Paul Szende; in Czechoslovakia – Edvard Beneš and Tomáš Garrigue Masaryk. Masonic judges, deputies, journalists, academics, intellectuals, trade unionists, civil servants and officials from ministries could be found in all European countries. But what did this mean in practice? In 1920, the Grande Loge de France (hereafter GLDF) counted around fifteen deputies to the National Assembly among its members, but it seemed to the Grand-Maître (Grand Master) Bernard Wellhoff, a socialist from Lille, that only one of these men was willing to combine Masonic ideals with his tasks as a deputy.2 This means that membership in a Masonic Lodge did not necessarily guarantee a direct implementation of Masonic ideals. On the other hand, many Freemasons did take the Masonic ideal seriously, and we thus find them among the founders of human rights leagues almost everywhere. The French Ligue des Droits de l’Homme established in 1898 was the first such league, and the Freemasons Auguste Delpech, Yves Guyot, Joseph Reinach, Paul Reclus, Charles Richet (Nobel Prize laureate for medicine in 1913) and Mathias Morhardt attended its first executive meeting. Further Masonic

1 2

A global overview is provided by Minder, Robert A. (2004): Freimaurer Politiker Lexikon. Von Salvador Allende bis Saad Zaghlul Pascha. Innsbruck. GLDF Bibliothèque, Bulletin Officiel, 1920, Convent 1920, opening speech by Grand Master Bernard Wellhoff, p. 15. For more details see now: Combes, André (2018): 1914–1968. La Franc-Maçonnerie, cœur battant de la République. Éclatée, féminisée, persécutée, renforcée. Préface d’Andreas Önnerfors. Paris (Collection L’univers maçonnique).

30

II. Freemasons and the Idea of Europe in the 1920s and 1930s

brothers were to be found among the League’s members.3 The Austrian League for Human Rights (founded in 1926) can be considered an entirely Masonic foundation, although it did not exclude non-Masons: Rudolf Goldscheid was its central figure, and he was assisted by Heinrich Engländer, Alexander Mintz, Robert Pelzer, Siegfried Norbert Rumpler, Karl Winter, Rudolf Huber-Wiesenthal, Fritz S. Kohn and Julian M. Lenard.4 Nearly the same can be said with regard to the Italian League, which was established in French exile in 1922. Its key founder was Luigi Campolonghi, member of the Grand Orient of Italy.5 The founder of the Romanian League of Human Rights, Constantin G. Costa-Foru, was likewise a Freemason6 – as was Luis Simarro, professor at the Central University of Madrid and co-founder of the Spanish League in 1913. Simarro was a member of the Spanish Grand Orient,7 and the relationship between the Spanish League and Freemasonry can be described as particularly close. The Polish League was established in 1921, and here too, Masonic brothers like Stanisław Posner assumed a decisive role in the foundation process.8 Many Masons were pacifists, and many pacifists were Masons. Not all, but certainly a large percentage of the Freemasons active during the interwar period can be regarded as constituents of civil society at the time. But did the idea of Europe also play an important role for them? Mainstream historiography on the idea of Europe as well as on Masonic history has rarely9 taken into consideration the fraternity’s concepts for European 3

4

5 6

7

8

9

See Gillard, Bernard (2005): Elle enseignait la République. La franc-maçonnerie, laboratoire pédagogique des valeurs républicaines de 1871 à 1906. Paris, p. 223–226. Naquet, Emmanuel (2014): Pour l’humanité. La Ligue des droits de l’homme, de l’affaire Dreyfus à la défaite de 1940. Rennes, provides a list of Freemasons who were members of the LDH, p. 488–489; he excludes Morhardt as well as Reclus and Richet. Treiblmayr, Christopher (2017): The Austrian League for Human Rights and its International Relations (1926–1938). In: Schmale/Treiblmayr, eds., Human Rights Leagues, op. cit., p. 223–256, here p. 229. Vial, Eric (2017): The Lega italiana dei diritti dell’uomo (Italian Human Rights League). In: Schmale/Treiblmayr, eds., Human Rights Leagues, op. cit., p. 173–193. Deyanov, Stilyan (2017): The Romanian League for Human Rights – a “Child of the Comintern”? (and possible comparison with the Bulgarian League). In: Schmale/Treiblmayr, eds., Human Rights Leagues, op. cit., p. 195–221, here p. 206. Aubert, Paul (2017): The Spanish League of Human Rights. In: Schmale/Treiblmayr, eds., Human Rights Leagues, op. cit., p. 123–137, here p. 124. On Simarro and his convictions, see also Ferrer Benimeli, José Antonio (1996): La masonería española. Madrid, p. 163–166 (on solidarity). Mrzygłod, Izabella (2017): The League for the Defence of Human and Civil Rights in Interwar Poland (1921–1937). In: Schmale/Treiblmayr, eds., Human Rights Leagues, op. cit., p. 157–172. The collection of lectures given by Freemasons at a Masonic conference in Ronchin (France) in 2004 according to Le Mercier, Jean-Luc; Lemaire, Jacques Ch., eds. (2006): Europe, Citoyenneté et Franc-Maçonnerie. Brussels, does not truly study the history of Masonic ideas of Europe. The lectures can be regarded as an exposé of present Masonic European thinking, which seems not to exhibit any particularities. Beaurepaire touches upon the Masonic notion of the League of Nations: Beaurepaire, Pierre-Yves (2002): L’Europe des francs-maçons, XVIIIe–XXIe siècles. Paris. More concrete information is provided by Lefebvre, Denis

Introduction

31

unity. Did Freemasons participate in the debate on European union or federation? Indeed they did. Freemasonry must be viewed as one of the major civil society players whose activities were entangled with other agents such as human rights leagues (often founded or co-founded by Freemasons, as we have heard), pacifists, League of Nations associations, leagues for secular education and school instruction, political parties, various branches of the freethinker movements and the like.10 In many European countries, late nineteenth- and early twentiethcentury Freemasonry supported democracy, public education and women’s rights – and was also anti-fascist. This was particularly the case with regard to “Latin Masonry”, i.e. Freemasons in countries with Romanic languages. But the Masons of the period also exhibited noticeable national differences: For example, French Freemasonry was anti-clerical while German Freemasonry was not. British Masons were largely Christian. It should also be noted that the Masonic organization was less secretive than is often claimed. Margaret C. Jacob stated that she “wanted to remove the veil from a secret society that turns out not to be very secret at all.”11 Freemasons took part in official ceremonies, e.g. burials. In the late nineteenth century and the first half of the twentieth century, many politicians, heads of governments and members of parliaments were Freemasons who did not hide their affiliation. It is true, however, that Masonic activities focused more on the individual and its humanitarian as well as personal education than on public propaganda – though the latter was not completely absent from the Masonic communication strategy. The purpose of this chapter is not to summarize the history of Freemasonry nor to trace its ups and downs and continuous modifications in great detail. Instead, I intend to take a close look at its convictions regarding Europe – precisely because of the role it played in civil society. Since we lack comparable studies, I decided to conduct a case study based on printed and archival material produced by the Grande Loge de France, supplemented with additional material referring to other countries and obtained from literature research as well as a few anthologies assembling primary sources. The Grand Orient de France (hereafter GODF), the Grande Loge de France and Le Droit Humain co-edited the review “L’Acacia”, which I examined for the interwar period. It corroborates opinions that are also expressed in the material of the Grande Loge. This material setting allows us to include European Masonry at least to some extent.12

(2003): La Franc-maçonnerie et la construction européenne. In: Bossuat, ed.: Inventer l’Europe, op. cit., p. 403–408. 10 These introductory remarks are based on studies listed below in the sub-chapter “Aspects of Masonic History”. 11 Jacob, Margaret C. (2006): The Origins of Freemasonry. Facts & Fictions. Philadelphia, p. 4. 12 Additionally, I looked through “Bulletin. Organe officiel de l’Association maçonnique internationale” from No 1, 1922 (= Bulletin No56, XXe année, Bureau international de relations maçonniques) to No 70, 1939 (copy in Archiv der Großloge von Österreich).

32

II. Freemasons and the Idea of Europe in the 1920s and 1930s

STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES OF EXISTING RESEARCH ON MASONRY Research on the history of the Masonic brotherhood has partly been carried out by Freemasons, but also by scholars like myself who are not members of the fraternity. A great number of apologetic and/or esoteric publications exist that will not be taken into consideration here. Literature on Masonic symbols and rituals is abundant as well but has no significant impact on this chapter’s purpose. Research on the “inner workings” of Masonic obediences and specific Lodges features quite prominently,13 with the establishment of Masonic structures and their ups and downs over time, conflicts between obediences at the level of national and international Masonic relations, and persecution, suppression and anti-Masonic propaganda being dominant topics. English (Great Britain, USA, other English-speaking countries), French (francophone scientific cultures), Italian and Spanish/Hispanic (Spain and Latin America) research on Masonry is generally characterized by high scientific quality. German (German-speaking countries) research is not very abundant, apparently reflecting the minor importance of the fraternity in German-speaking civil society, and this shortfall is scarcely made up for by international research on German Freemasonry. Studies on Freemasonry in East-Central Europe, South-Eastern Europe, Russia, the Ottoman Empire and Turkey exist, but are comparatively marginal in international research. Eighteenth-century Freemasonry in particular has frequently captured the interest of researchers,14 though by now there is also a host of valuable studies on developments during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Among the popular current topics are female Masonry15 and Masons in the colonies of the European powers.16 Synthesized European approaches to Masonic history constitute a

13 See for example Gillard, Bernard (2005): Elle enseignait la République, op. cit. The author claims to be a Freemason himself. 14 European overviews are: Jacob, Margaret C. (1991): Living the Enlightenment. Freemasonry and Politics in Eighteenth-Century Europe. New York. Jacob, Margaret C. (2006): Origins of Freemasonry, op. cit. 15 For the 18th century, see Jacob, Origins of Freemasonry, op. cit., ch. 5. Hivert-Messeca, Yves (2012–2018): L’Europe sous l’acacia. Histoire des franc-maçonneries européennes du XVIIIe siècle à nos jours, 4 vols. Paris, vol. 2, dedicates chapters 32–35 to mixed and female Masonry. Alba, Yolanda (2014): Masonas. Historia de la masonería femenina. Córdoba. Bacot, Jean-Pierre (2009): Les femmes et la Franc-Maçonnerie en Europe. Histoire et géographie d’une inégalité. Paris. Ortiz Albear, Natividad (2005): Las mujeres en la masonería. Málaga: Universidad de Málaga. Vigni, Francesca; Vigni, Pier Domenico (1997): Donna e massoneria in Italia dalle origini ad oggi. Foggia. Hivert-Messeca, Gisèle; Hivert-Messeca, Yves (1997): Comment la Franc-Maçonnerie vint aux femmes. Deux siècles de Franc-Maçonnerie d’adoption, féminine et mixte en France, 1740–1940. Paris. 16 Badila, Joseph; Béresniak, Daniel (2008): Les francs-maçons et l’Afrique. Une rencontre fraternelle. Avec la collaboration de Jean Moreau. Paris. Harland-Jacobs, Jessica L. (2007): Builders of Empire. Freemasons and British Imperialism, 1717–1927. Chapel Hill: University

Aspects of Masonic History

33

relatively recent phenomenon: One might cite the collection of articles edited by Luis P. Martín on Masonic political culture in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries,17 the one-volume overview written by Beaurepaire18 and the four volumes by Yves Hivert-Messeca. Volume 3 of the latter (published in 2016) deals with European Masonic history during the twentieth century.19 What is lacking to some extent is systematic research on Masonic discourses. Naturally, most studies quote short or more extensive sections of primary sources, manuscripts and imprints to back their respective authors’ interpretations of Masonic political, social or legal opinions – but most authors do not seek nor apply representative methods of investigation. A specificity of Masonic research is that primary sources are often listed only summarily in the annexes of studies. In many cases, quotations are not concretely documented in footnotes as required by the rules of sound scientific practice. This is not to say that these authors cannot be credited with serious research, but to some extent they seem to expect their readers to simply take their statements on faith.20 Anthologies presenting collections of primary sources to elucidate a concrete choice of historical questions are rare.21 ASPECTS OF MASONIC HISTORY At an early stage in its modern history, which began in the early eighteenth century (1717: four lodges form the Grand Lodge of London; 1723: Anderson’s statutes)22, Freemasonry became a global phenomenon.23 It was exported from Europe to the Americas and to Europe’s colonies in general. In the second half of the nineteenth century, membership increased dramatically. Masonry reached the peak of its influence on politics and society during the interwar period. Around 1919/20, the lodges in the United States of America alone totalled around two million members. 300,000 Masons existed in Latin America, 270,000 in the

17 18 19 20 21

22

23

of North Carolina Press. Odo, Georges (2001): La Franc-Maçonnerie dans les colonies 1738– 1960. Paris (Encyclopédie maçonnique, 30). Martín, Luis P., ed. (2000): Les francs-maçons dans la cité. Les cultures politiques de la Franc-Maçonnerie en Europe (XIXe–XXe siècle). Rennes: Presses universitaires de Rennes. Beaurepaire, L’Europe des francs-maçons, op. cit. Hivert-Messeca, L’Europe sous l’acacia, op. cit. (4 vols.: vol. 1: 2012; vol. 2: 2014; vol. 3: 2016; vol. 4: 2018). One example is: Alba, Masonas, op. cit. The author lists libraries and archives she consulted, but there are no detailed annotations or footnotes in the text. One of the rare exceptions is the anthology by Ferrer Benimeli, La masonería española, op. cit. See also Chato Gonzalo, Ignazio, ed. (1997): Las relaciones masónicas entre España y Portugal 1866–1932. Un estudio de la formación de los nacionalismos español y portugués a través de la masonería. Mérida, 55 documents, p. 241–379. See Jacob, Origins of Freemasonry, op. cit., ch. 1. The statutes and other key texts are edited in: [Anderson, James]; Langlet, Philippe, ed. (2018): La Constitution des francs-maçons 1723. Paris (Les dix-huitièmes siècles, 202). See e.g. Bogdan, Henrik; Snoek, J. A. M., eds. (2014): Handbook of Freemasonry. Leiden (Brill Handbooks on Contemporary Religion).

34

II. Freemasons and the Idea of Europe in the 1920s and 1930s

United Kingdom, 40,000 in Germany, and about 32,000 in France.24 Altogether, the European lodges may have had up to around half a million members. The most important obediences were the Grand Orients (hereafter GO) and the Grand Lodges (hereafter GL), but there existed many more such as Le Droit Humain, a mixed obedience with sisters and brothers established in 1893 by Maria Deraismes25, Gaston Martin and Léon Richer. Le Droit Humain was conceived as an international obedience, not a national one like most others. In 1914, it had between 12,000 and 14,000 members in the Western world.26 All obediences shared common humanitarian ideals regardless of nationality, skin colour or ethnicity. These ideals were universal fraternity, solidarity, humanism, charity and – to some extent – philanthropism. French and Spanish Masonry explicitly referred to the French revolutionary motto of “liberté, égalité, fraternité”. The Grande Loge de France likewise reminded its members regularly of the meaning of these three concepts, and its Conseil Fédéral proposed a resolution to the 1923 convention that developed the entire democratic constitution of a republic out of the three keywords. The resolution was adopted by the convention, which also decided that it should be specially printed for distribution among the brothers and future brothers presently being initialized.27 Despite the universal character of Masonic ideals, however, organizing Masonic internationalism proved difficult.28 A convention in Lausanne in 1875 assembled a number of obediences that recognized the so-called Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite. The aim of this convention was to harmonize and adapt general Masonic intentions and rules to “modern civilization”.29 Trans- and international relations between the obediences were nevertheless common: “National” obediences established lodges in foreign countries and in the colonies. Some lodges also accepted members from other countries. For example, one fifth of the members of the lodge Bonaparte, founded in 1854, were not from France,30 and Le Droit Humain never adopted any form of national limitation. Relationships were enhanced through the reciprocal establishment of “garants d’amitiés” with obediences in other countries, under which members of one obedience would attend conventions and other meetings of their “befriended” 24 For the numbers, cf. Hivert-Messeca, L’Europe sous l’acacia, op. cit., vol. 3: Le XXe siècle. Le temps du martyre, de la révolution d’Octobre à la chute du mur de Berlin (2016), p. 33. 25 See Leloup, Fabienne (2015): Maria Deraismes. Riche, féministe et franc-maçonne. Paris. Leloup’s work is a mixture of literary fiction and research resulting in a vivid and plausible portrait of Maria Deraismes based on historic facts. 26 For the numbers, see Beaurepaire, L’Europe des francs-maçons, op. cit., p. 245. See also Bacot, Les femmes et la Franc-Maçonnerie en Europe, op. cit., p. 46 and 39–85 (lodges). 27 GLDF Bibliothèque, Bulletin Officiel, 1923, No 25, p. 25–28. 28 A good overview is provided in Berger, Joachim: European Freemasonries, 1850–1935: Networks and Transnational Movements. In: Europäische Geschichte Online (EGO), ed. Institut für Europäische Geschichte (IEG), Mainz, http://www.ieg-ego.eu/bergerj-2010-en, URN: urn:nbn:de:0159-20100921522 (accessed 3 November 2017). 29 Chato Gonzalo, ed., Las relaciones masónicas entre España y Portugal, op. cit., ch. 4.1, here p. 114. 30 See Beaurepaire, L’Europe des francs-maçons, op. cit., p. 226.

Aspects of Masonic History

35

obediences as often as possible. The establishment of this type of international Masonic cordiality based on bilateral relations was submitted to the national conventions as a matter of debate – a procedure that offered an opportunity to look more closely at the respective country and its national contexts as well as how Freemasons there behaved, and may well have contributed to disseminating knowledge about various European countries among brothers. A brief example may illustrate how international Masonic communication worked, or could work. In summer 1926, Bernard Wellhoff, honorary Grand Master of the GLDF, visited the lodge Munificentia in Carlsbad, which belonged to the GL Lessing zu den drei Ringen and had asked Wellhoff to be its representative at the GLDF. Wellhoff spoke about Masonry and the ideal of peace.31 He highlighted general views discussed among the brothers of the GLDF on contemporary problems like nationalism, injustices committed by the peace treaties, the League of Nations and its advantages and deficiencies, the Franco-German reconciliation with regard to French and German Masonry, and other topics. His speech was published several months later in the “Bulletin Officiel” of the GLDF and in the Viennese “Wiener Freimaurer-Zeitung”32. The Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of Poland, St. Stempowski, learned of the speech by way of the latter medium and proceeded to write a letter to Wellhoff that included a number of comments concerning the Danzig question, to which Wellhoff had alluded.33 He also asked Wellhoff to publish the letter in the “Bulletin Officiel” of the GLDF and the “Wiener Freimaurer-Zeitung”, and it was eventually reproduced in the “Bulletin”. This is how international communication among Freemasons took place and how different or diverging viewpoints and opinions were exchanged.34 Maurice Monier, Grand Master of the GLDF in 1923, reconstructed the history of international Masonry in an article published in the “Bulletin Officiel” of the Association Maçonnique Internationale as well as that of the GLDF. Despite referring to a long sequence of international Masonic congresses since the second half of the nineteenth century (in reality since 1889), he concluded that no international Masonry had existed before World War I. One reason for this, according to Monier, had been the desire for “national autonomy” in Masonic affairs. Thanks to the efforts of the Swiss Freemason Édouard Quartier-La-Tente, Conseiller d’Etat of the canton of Neuchâtel, a Bureau International des Relations Maçonniques had been established in 1903 (1 January) by the international congress of Masonry in Geneva.35 31 For more details, see Schmale, Wolfgang (2018): Friedensinitiativen französischer Freimaurer in der Zwischenkriegszeit. In: Dingel, Irene; Paulmann, Johannes; Schnettger, Matthias; Wrede, Martin, eds.: Theatrum Belli – Theatrum Pacis. Konflikte und Konfliktregelungen im frühneuzeitlichen Europa. Göttingen, p. 277–284. 32 Wiener Freimaurer-Zeitung, 1926, No 7–9, p. 19–20. The journal published articles about Masons in other countries and contributions by foreign pens. 33 Ibid., p. 20. 34 GLDF Bibliothèque, Bulletin Officiel, 1927, No 43, p. 60–65. 35 GLDF Bibliothèque, Bulletin Officiel, 1923, No 24, Maurice Monier: “Une Internationale sans Rome ni Moscou”, p. 159–161.

36

II. Freemasons and the Idea of Europe in the 1920s and 1930s

Indeed, the Swiss Masons often functioned as bridge-builders within European Masonry.36 During the twentieth century, various initiatives began to improve the international relationships among the obediences: A Masonic world congress was scheduled for September 1920 in Rome but eventually postponed to 1921. In 1920, Grand Master Wellhoff of the GLDF convoked a preparatory meeting between the GL of Belgium, the GO of Italy, the GL of Portugal, the GL of Yugoslavia and the GO of France.37 Arguably, it was the creation of the League of Nations that eventually motivated Freemasons to federate internationally and back the League.38 The international congress finally took place in Geneva on 19–23 October 1921. It was attended by 17 Masonic bodies, with two others declaring their affiliation from afar, which was accepted by the congress.39 The congress resolved to establish the Association Maçonnique Internationale (AMI) and adopted a charter that confirmed the general Masonic principles, emphasizing “liberté, égalité, fraternité” and other key concepts such as peace, humanitarianism, solidarity, tolerance, perfectibility of man and society, welfare and social progress. The congress also raised various questions concerning the admission of women to the fraternity, the introduction of an international Masonic passport, Armenia, prisoners of war in (Soviet40) Russia, promotion of the League of Nations, the conception of labour and the obligation to work, and the relationship between labour and capital. Within a few years after World War I, two new structures of international Masonry had been created: the Fédération Internationale Maçonnique pour la Société des Nations and the Association Maçonnique Internationale.41 Neither of them proved to be particularly successful, however.42 Despite certain efforts to internationalize, the political success Masonry enjoyed in various countries bound it to the nation state. This is especially true for Freemasons who became ministers or even heads of governments. During the second half of the nineteenth century, Freemasonry became affiliated with movements struggling for national unity. This was by no means an “all-male affair”, 36 Hivert-Messeca, L’Europe sous l’acacia, op. cit., vol. 2, p. 724–727. 37 GLDF Bibliothèque, Bulletin Officiel, Convent 1920, opening speech by Grand Master Wellhoff, p. 17–18. 38 GLDF Bibliothèque, Bulletin Officiel, Convent 1920, conclusion by the convention, p. 35. 39 GLDF Bibliothèque, Bulletin Officiel, December 1921, report by Maurice Monier, GrandOrateur of the GLDF, p. 47–59. GL Bulgaria; GL France; GL Italy; GL New York; GL Spain; GL State of Louisiana; GL Alpina Switzerland; GL Vienna; GL Yugoslavia; GL Zur aufgehenden Sonne (Germany). GO Belgium; GO France; GO Italy; GO Portugal; GO Spain; GO Netherlands; GO Turkey; Suprême Conseil Grand-Duché de Luxembourg. Adhesion: GL Chile; Club of American Masonry in Germany. Beaurepaire, L’Europe des francs-maçons, op. cit., p. 254, offers a slightly different account of the events, seemingly based on material from the GO archives in Paris. 40 Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic, founded in 1917. 41 For basic information, see “League of Nations search engine”, http://www.lonsea.de/pub/ org/397. 42 Beaurepaire, L’Europe des francs-maçons, op. cit., drafts a very sceptical portrait of the AMI, p. 253–257.

Aspects of Masonic History

37

but in fact included women – and especially female Masons. In Italy, for instance, Giuseppe Garibaldi, leader of the national unification movement, was also a leading figure in Italian Freemasonry who encouraged the establishment of female lodges and promoted female Masonry in general. The Italian national unification movement came quite close to the ideal of women’s social and legal emancipation and adopted an anti-clerical perspective, and part of Italian Freemasonry supported women’s emancipation from as early as the second half of the 1860s. Female Freemasons were deeply involved in the emancipation process.43 Most obediences and lodges were or eventually became characterized by national traditions and patriotism, sometimes even by nationalism. Following the Franco-German War of 1870/71, some German Masonic groups became noticeably nationalistic and produced aggressive undertones. Later, German Freemasonry was nearly cut off from the rest of the brotherhood in Europe: World War I caused an open break between the majority of German and French Masons. An exception was the Freimaurerbund zur aufgehenden Sonne founded in 1907.44 Its members were outspoken proponents of Franco-German reconciliation and believed – like their French brothers – that Freemasons could and should play a proactive role in it. Even within the national frame of reference, friendships between different obediences required active and continuous engagement along with a lot of goodwill. The same was true for the situation within each obedience. This is to say that Freemasonry should not be considered a homogeneous bloc at the global or national level, nor even at the level of the individual obedience. While the brotherhood was by no means permanently swamped with home-grown problems or engaged exclusively in symbolism and rituals, disagreements and disputes were certainly not unknown in Masonic history. Nevertheless, reference to the same humanitarian spirit brought Freemasons together wherever they met. They could address one another openly because they shared the same principles: Although most obediences were patriotic and supported their respective national consciousness, the ideals of fraternity and solidarity remained binding. Thus on 18 November 1918, Wilhelm Süss, Grand Master of the German lodge Zur Eintracht in Darmstadt, broadcast an appeal to his English brothers for help in ensuring that the rules established by the armistice of 11 November were respected, asking them to support the needy German population materially. This radio appeal also reached Scandinavian and Latin American obediences.45 During World War II, Masonic prisoners of war in German camps met with their brothers from other countries and obediences.46 43 Vigni/Vigni, Donna e massoneria in Italia, op. cit. 44 Peters, Bruno (1986): Die Geschichte der Freimaurerei im Deutschen Reich 1870–1933. Berlin. The study is serious, but its primary sources are listed only summarily. The author was initiated into the GL Zur aufgehenden Sonne in 1950. On German Freemasonry see also Hoffmann, Stefan-Ludwig (2007): The Politics of Sociability. Freemasonry and German civil society, 1840–1918. Ann Arbor, Mich.: University of Michigan Press. 45 Hivert-Messeca, L’Europe sous l’acacia, op. cit., vol. 3, p. 44. 46 Hivert-Messeca, L’Europe sous l’acacia, op. cit., vol. 3, ch. 15.

38

II. Freemasons and the Idea of Europe in the 1920s and 1930s

Freemasonry was combatted by the Catholic Church and right-wing parties, and it was suppressed by the autocratic, dictatorial and fascist regimes47 in interwar Europe. But not all Freemasons were anti-fascists. In the early hours of fascism in Italy, there existed an entanglement between Masonry and the political movement,48 both of which shared certain anti-clerical views.49 Masonry was soon denounced by the fascists, however, and the Freemasons were eventually dissolved and outlawed in Italy in 1925. Its members went into exile or continued to operate in secrecy.50 Prussian-German Masons had a number of right-wing opinions, including anti-Semitism, in common with the National Socialist party.51 This did not prevent the Nazis from suppressing Freemasonry in 1935 and persecuting Masons who were Jews or had a Jewish background or were socialists, however. In Spain, Franco was openly anti-Masonic; he and his propagandists combined anti-Semitism and anti-Masonry from the civil-war period onwards, and both minorities were heavily persecuted by the regime.52 In France, a large number of Freemasons participated in resistance movements,53 and many of them were murdered. Others did not distance themselves from the Vichy regime of Philippe Pétain.54 Since its inception, Freemasonry had regularly been denounced as a secret and subversive society undermining the state, and these attacks were combined with anti-Judaism and anti-Semitism between the wars, for example by Franco and other dictators.55 The public image of Freemasonry today is dominated by ignorance or prejudices derived from historic anti-Masonic propaganda, and its 47 Overview covering Germany, Austria, Italy, France and Spain: Reinalter, Helmut, ed. (2009): Freimaurerei und europäischer Faschismus. Innsbruck. On Austria, see Patka, Marcus G. (2009): Freimaurerei und “Austrofaschismus”. In: Reinalter, ed., Freimaurerei und europäischer Faschismus, op. cit., p. 52–69. 48 Vatri, Giuseppe M. (2012): Italian Freemasonry and Fascism. The Search for a Political Relation from Friendship to Defence (1922–1923). In: Papenheim, Martin, ed.: Italian and German Freemasonry in the Time of Fascism and National Socialism. Four Essays and a Comparative Introduction. Bayreuth (European Masonic Papers, 1), p. 17–47. Venzi, Fabio (2008): Massoneria e fascismo. Dall’intesa cordiale alla distruzione delle logge: come nasce una “guerra di religione”, 1921–1925. Rome. 49 Melfa, Valentina Marica (2010): Massoneria e fascismo. Dall’interventismo alla lotta partigiana. Catania, p. 51. 50 Fedele, Santi (2005): La massoneria italiana nell’esilio e nella clandestinità: 1927–1939. Milan. 51 Niemeyer, Dirk (2012): The Grand Lodge of Prussia (GLPr) and the “No Politics Clause” in the Weimar Republic and the Early Third Reich. In: Papenheim, ed., Italian and German Freemasonry, op. cit., p. 83–115. 52 Domínguez Arribas, Javier (2016): L’ennemi judéo-maçonnique dans la propagande franquiste (1936–1945). Paris. 53 For France, see Combes, André (2001): La franc-maçonnerie sous l’Occupation. Persécution et résistance (1939–1945). Monaco. 54 With a focus on Masonic ambivalence (resistance and collaboration) and individual portraits, see Pierrat, Emmanuel (2016): Les francs-maçons sous l’Occupation. Entre résistance et collaboration. Paris. 55 See as an exemplary study: Domínguez Arribas, L’ennemi judéo-maçonnique, op. cit.

Aspects of Masonic History

39

still persisting structure of a male fraternity continues to be cause for criticism. This image is backed by an abundant production of literature serving the desire of the reading public for the exposure of purportedly scandalous secret societies mixed with esoteric aspects. But as Paul Calderwood showed in his regional study on “Freemasonry and the Press in the Twentieth Century”56 in England and Wales, the public image of Masonry deteriorated primarily for reasons owed to the oppressive political regimes in Europe and their anti-Masonic propaganda. Anti-Masonic propaganda by the Catholic Church likewise had a substantial impact on public opinion of the brotherhood. Despite the image created by this anti-Masonic opinion-making, European Freemasonry adopted an active role in civil society starting in the second half of the nineteenth century, at a moment when designing society in its developing national framing became a crucial undertaking. Despite the fact that the nation state became the sphere of progressive social and other reforms, many of these reforms and the associated debates going beyond concrete legislative acts were quite similar throughout Europe. This is principally true for France, Italy, Spain and Portugal, where Freemasons (i.e. Latin Masonry) backed the national reform developments.57 On a more general scale, the principle that Freemasonry contributed to the ideological foundation of the nation state as a firmly constitutional type of state applies at least to all European countries including the Balkans.58 Masonry in Belgium59 was part of the francophone Masonic sphere, but also had to integrate the Flemish half of Belgium. In Luxemburg,60 the majority of the population was bilingual, speaking both French and Luxemburgish, a Germanic dialect, and had close ties to Germany. Dutch Masonry61 deployed in the Netherlands as well as in the Dutch colonies, thus supporting this “commercial empire”. English Masonry remains a special case. Its horizon was the British Empire, and it was closely tied to the ruling dynasty, the Anglican Church and the conservative party.62 Freemasonry in the Scandinavian countries63 was characterized by a high density and strong connections to Lutheran Protestantism. Especially in Norway, which separated from Sweden in 1905, Masonry became constituent for the nation state: The country’s first king Haakon VII, a Danish prince, was a Freemason. 56 Calderwood, Paul (2013): Freemasonry and the Press in the Twentieth Century. A National Newspaper Study of England and Wales. Farnham. 57 See Hivert-Messeca, Yves, L’Europe sous l’acacia, op. cit., vol. 2, part 3 (Freemasonry 1860– 1900) and part 4 (1880–1910). For Italy, see Cazzaniga, Gian Mario, ed. (2012): La Massoneria. Torino (Storia d’Italia. Annali, 21), parts 5–6 (19th and 20th centuries). 58 Hivert-Messeca, L’Europe sous l’acacia, op. cit., vol. 2, ch. 41. 59 Hivert-Messeca, L’Europe sous l’acacia, op. cit., vol. 2, p. 653–655. On Belgian Freemasonry, see also the recent study by Wagnon, Sylvain (2018): De Condorcet à Decroly. La francmaçonnerie belge, l’éducation et l’enseignement (XIXe–XXe). Brussels. 60 Dées de Sterio, Alexandre Marius (1998): La Franc-Maçonnerie au Luxembourg. Paris (Encyclopédie maçonnique, 5). 61 Hivert-Messeca, L’Europe sous l’acacia, op. cit., vol. 2, p. 656–658. 62 Hivert-Messeca, L’Europe sous l’acacia, op. cit., vol. 2, ch. 36 (“Rule British Masonry”). 63 Hivert-Messeca, L’Europe sous l’acacia, op. cit., vol. 2, p. 647–651 (Scandinavian Masonry).

40

II. Freemasons and the Idea of Europe in the 1920s and 1930s

Not all obediences and all Freemasons were progressive, however; the debate on which way was the “right” way often became quite harsh and caused friction between the members of individual obediences. But those disputes are not the topic of this book chapter. I will focus instead on the actual published and practical outcomes produced by Freemasonry in support of a society conceived as democratic and based on gender equality, human rights and peaceful international – or at least European – relations. Religion was a frequent topic with reference to the foundations of Freemasonry itself as well as in regard to the conception of state and society as secular. One of the Masonic core topics – arising logically, as it were, from Freemasonry’s concept of self – was education.64 The brotherhood viewed education mostly from a secular perspective, as was the case in Italy, Spain and France. Freemasonry merits interest with respect to the interwar period in particular because it reached the historical peak of its impact on politics and society during that time. This was partially due to the large number of civil society associations forging alliances or cooperating from time to time wherever their fundamental aims and convictions coincided. Freemasonry placed emphasis on individual activity in the sense that each individual member was expected to educate himself or herself continuously. Of course, other associations hoped that their members would do this as well, but for Masons, it was a principle of their self-image – and Freemasonry provided the necessary material and non-material structures to support its members in this regard. Therefore, one can presume – and this will be corroborated by the case study below – that the degree of commitment by the individual Freemason was higher and more reliable in comparison with other associations. Naturally, it is impossible to measure such a presumed difference and its practical impact precisely. Initiation into a Masonic lodge was followed by a path of instruction and education linked to the three degrees of Apprentice, Fellowcraft and Master.65 But self-education and self-instruction did not cease after a member had reached the degree of Master Mason – it continued and was also a collective interest. One instrument supporting this goal was the annual convention, in the run-up to which the central organs sent out topics of interest supplemented with appropriate basic material to the lodges. The latter were invited – if not obliged, at least by principle – to discuss these topics and write corresponding reports. Depending on the topic, a larger or smaller number of lodges would respond by submitting a collective report, or sometimes more than one report. Normally, the central organs elected a brother whose task was to compile and synthesize all reports submitted on a specific topic. During the convention, these summaries – including concrete 64 See from an exemplary perspective in the study by Cruz, José Ignacio (1993): Masonería y educación en la II República Española. Alicante. Cruz shows the entanglement of the idea of education in the Masonic sphere as well as in the public sphere. 65 Informative exhibition catalogue with essays: Berger, Joachim; Grün, Klaus-Jürgen, eds. (2002): Geheime Gesellschaft. Weimar und die deutsche Freimaurerei. Katalog zur Ausstellung der Stiftung Weimarer Klassik im Schiller-Museum Weimar 21. Juni bis 31. Dezember 2002. Munich. Further degrees followed in high degree Freemasonry.

Aspects of Masonic History

41

references to the individual lodges that had taken part in the preparation – were presented to the audience. After the meeting, they could be printed in the bulletin (or similar publication) of the obedience. In the archives, we find such reports by the various lodges and individual members as well as the local bulletins published by individual lodges. Generally speaking, a topic such as the United States of Europe would be on the agenda of Masonic conventions, and in fact it is among the topics and contents often encountered in Freemasons’ speeches and papers. The French Mason Charles Lemonnier published a treatise entitled “Les États-Unis d’Europe” as early as 1872.66 He was also the editor of a journal of the same name issued by the Ligue (internationale) de [or: pour] la paix et la liberté founded in Geneva in 1867.67 The journal was launched in 1868.68 One of its later editors was Élie Ducommun from Switzerland, who also served as secretary of the Ligue. He was Grand Master of the GL Suisse-Alpina from 1890 to 1895 and received the Nobel Prize for Peace in 1902.69 The interweavement of Freemasonry with the peace movement worked in favour of Masonic internationalism and the idea of a United States of Europe.70 In the same vein, Freemasons had a keen interest in the establishment of an international lingua franca such as Esperanto. Masons who attended the first international Esperanto congress in Boulogne-sur-Mer in 1905 established the Esperanto Framasona, known after 1913 as the Universala Framasona Ligo.71 The idea of Europe in Freemasonry is fascinating because the degree of intellectual intensity and activity of the average Masonic brother or sister seemed to be higher than that of the members of other associations. Of course, individual members and central organs regularly complained about inactivity or disinterest, but the actual average level of activity seems to have been higher than elsewhere. Therefore, examining the idea of Europe and debates on the topic in Freemasonry brings us closer to individual people and citizens and their ideas. Not all of these notions were entirely original, but that is not the point. Rather, they are interesting in that they evidence the circulation of well-known ideas among a broader public and prove that people were able – on an individual as well as a collective level (i.e. that of the lodges) – to reproduce, discuss and adapt those ideas.72 66 Lemonnier, Charles (1872): Les États-Unis d’Europe. Paris: Librairie de la Bibliothèque Démocratique. The French spelling of the term “United States of Europe” varies: “ÉtatsUnis …” or “Etats-Unis …” (with or without accent). 67 See Petricioli/Cherubini/Anteghini, eds., Les Etats-Unis d’Europe, op. cit. 68 Lemonnier’s book and the journal of 1868 are displayed in open access at http://gallica. bnf.fr/. 69 Conti, Fulvio (2015): La Franc-maçonnerie et le mouvement pour la paix en Europe (1889– 1914). In: Cahiers de la Méditerranée, No 91, p. 87–99, http://cdlm.revues.org/8101 (open access), § 10. 70 See in general terms: Conti, La Franc-maçonnerie et le mouvement pour la paix, op. cit., and Petricioli/Cherubini/Anteghini, eds., Les Etats-Unis d’Europe, op. cit. 71 Conti, La Franc-maçonnerie et le mouvement pour la paix, op. cit., § 30. 72 For a case study, see Schmale, Wolfgang (2019): Legacy of the Enlightenment: The Use of European History and Culture in French Civil Society in the Interwar Years by the Ligue des

42

II. Freemasons and the Idea of Europe in the 1920s and 1930s

MASONIC “UNITED STATES OF EUROPE” The Setting of the Case Study The aim of the following case study is to deepen the discourse on Masonic notions pertaining to Europe by using a defined corpus of primary sources. The principal axis is constituted by the “Bulletin Officiel” of the GLDF, a printed periodical containing general information on the GLDF, the resolutions passed by the Conseil Fédéral and the meetings (“tenues” or “assises générales”) of the Grande Loge, essays, speeches, material serving for the preparation of the annual conventions as well as summaries of the reports produced for them by local lodges, the minutes and summaries of the conventions, and similar texts. The “notes” or “exposés” addressed to the brothers often reveal a didactic aspect by stating what was to be studied in any case and what should come first, second, third and so on. I used the copy stored at the Bibliothèque de la Grande Loge de France, part of the archives of the GLDF, which includes separate printings, handwritten remarks and deletions and the like. Part of the material provided by the vast GLDF archives is comprised of nothing other than the handwritten and/or typed pages that were later printed in the “Bulletin”. But at the same time, it goes far beyond a mere parallel transmission of documents. The material also provides excellent insights into the daily life of the local lodges and their relationships with the centre in Paris, and contains many essays and treaties established by the local lodges concerning the main questions to be dealt with at the annual conventions. This allows us to investigate the diversity of opinions characteristic of such a large organization. This material is supplemented with articles from the review “L’Acacia”, which can be regarded as a major voice of French Freemasonry representing the GLDF, Grand Orient and Le Droit Humain, the transnational lodge. The ideas and opinions expressed by the authors of these various French original sources can be compared to other thoughts and notions voiced in and by other European lodges. In addition, I examined the “Wiener Freimaurer-Zeitung” published by the Grand Lodge of Vienna and the “Bulletin” of the Association Maçonnique Internationale. The “Wiener Freimaurer-Zeitung” adopted the character of an international Masonic periodical. Naturally, exhaustive research into all of the European Masonic archives would be required to paint a representative picture of European Masonry at large and its idea of Europe. The GLDF organized annual conventions starting in 1907,73 with the two World Wars causing interruptions (1913–1919; 1940–1944). The habitual procedure74 applied by the GLDF was the following: The topics for the annual convendroits de l’homme and Grande Loge de France. In: History. Journal of the Historical Association, vol. 104, No 361, DOI: 10.1111/1468-229X.12817 (open access). 73 Internal list provided by François Rognier, GLDF Archives. 74 Discussions about the most effective procedure occurred regularly; see e.g. Convention 1921, minutes published in Bulletin Officiel, 1921, p. 74–75.

Masonic “United States of Europe”

43

tions were fixed by the Conseil Fédéral, which had sometimes been charged with considering one or another matter by the previous convention. To help the lodges with their individual preparation on the topics, the GLDF published outlines or preliminary studies addressing major problems in the “Bulletin Officiel”, often phrasing them in the form of questions to be answered. These outlines were supplemented by a brief bibliography. As regional congresses bringing together the local lodges from an area existed as well, the questions were generally first debated here. The local lodges submitted their findings and reports to the regional congress as well as directly to the Conseil Fédéral in Paris. A summary of each regional congress was also sent to the Conseil Fédéral. At the general convention, so-called “commissions” were elected to handle the further intellectual work with regard to the chosen topics, and each commission elected a rapporteur to present its results to the convention. The commissions were expected to prepare conclusions and present them to the plenum, which could choose to adopt them after discussion. The reports, discussions and conclusions were documented and published in the “Bulletin Officiel”. Despite the “pre-selection” during the regional congresses, each commission seems to have been provided with all of the respective reports worked out by the individual lodges. The number of reports from the local level varied enormously, ranging from two or three dozen to almost a hundred. Between each convention and the one in the following year, the GLDF held two or three so-called Grandes Loges with deputies from the local lodges. These Grandes Loges could make decisions on which questions to be communicated to the lodges for the coming convention. Masonic work thus progressed throughout the year and maintained active communication and discussion. In 1924, the Grand Master reported to the convention that the Secretary General had received around 16,000 letters from brothers during the past year.75 Naturally, not all of these letters contributed to the intellectual debate; brothers also frequently asked the GLDF to intervene on their behalf, e.g. with a ministry or other public authority. As mentioned above, the archive boxes often contain parallel records: handwritten and/or typewritten originals as well as their official publications in the “Bulletin Officiel”. At times one also encounters first drafts that differ from the final versions. Correspondence with the rapporteur, the Conseil Fédéral and other brothers rounds off the material. It sometimes displays divergent views, but these were also reproduced by the printed minutes or summaries of the conventions, meaning that the “Bulletin Officiel” did not favour certain opinions or obscure intellectual conflicts. The archives and the “Bulletin Officiel” constitute the basis for the Masonic memory of the GLDF and a historical memory. Many of the preserved texts reveal far-flung historical perspectives. Active Freemasons were broadly educated people, as it seems – and to this base we must add the underlying Masonic ideals and convictions as well as the continuous contacts and encounters with brothers from 75 GLDF Bibliothèque, Bulletin Officiel, 1924, No 31, opening speech by Grand Master Maurice Monier, p. 28.

44

II. Freemasons and the Idea of Europe in the 1920s and 1930s

other lodges and orientations, such as the Grands Orients of neighbouring or faraway countries. This allows us to speak of a “Masonic discourse”. As we have seen in the introduction to this chapter, the essential Masonic tendencies differed depending on orientation as well as on the respective country, but in very general terms, European unification and the idea of Europe were part of the Masonic discourse everywhere. The Masonic Idea of Europe and Colonialism The idea of a “United States of Europe” plays a considerable role in the papers, discussions and conventions of the Grande Loge de France during the 1920s and 1930s. It is part of the intellectual Masonic heritage built up in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century and entangled with the concept of the League of Nations. As early as January 1917, the Parisian lodges of the GODF and GLDF hosted a “conférence des maçonneries des pays alliés” to debate a future association of nations. The conference was attended by Masons from Belgium, Italy, Portugal and Serbia. In June 1917, the GODF, the GLDF and other obediences from Argentina, Belgium, Italy, Portugal, Serbia, Spain and Switzerland met again and declared their support for President Woodrow Wilson’s plan for a League of Nations. Various obediences from Costa Rica, Brazil and the USA were represented by European Freemasons.76 The notion of a United States of Europe was embedded in a broader debate on democracy and civilization. The 1929 convention of the Fédération française du Droit Humain for example, also explored the issue of États-Unis d’Europe.77 Obviously, “Europe” constituted a fundamental background of Masonic political thought – although the Freemasons themselves would probably not have used the phrasing “political thinking”, since Masonic thinking to them was moral and philosophical and applicable in a universal sense, not just to European issues. The topics they discussed were nevertheless highly political, of course. A reference typical for texts and speeches of the GLDF is “les peuples d’Europe” – the peoples of Europe. This represents a field for projections, for a people – even the German people – is considered a kind of moral entity to be viewed separately from the intentions of the government ruling it, particularly if the latter is seen very critically. In other words, forging peace among peoples would be easier than among governments. This was the reason why many Masonic obediences strongly supported democracy and human rights. The texts published by the “Bulletin Officiel” continuously evoke the current political situation in Europe (and beyond), and all key political initiatives during the interwar period in favour of peace and European understanding were mirrored in the GLDF.

76 See Hivert-Messeca, L’Europe sous l’acacia, op. cit., vol 3, p. 39. 77 See Beaurepaire, L’Europe des francs-maçons, op. cit., p. 264.

Masonic “United States of Europe”

45

A second typical reference closely connected to “Europe” was “civilization”. The Masonic idea of Europe went beyond the political and economic concept of a United States of Europe – it was embedded in a larger conception and consciousness of European civilization. It was frequently evoked in passing, but during the second half of the 1920s, Freemasons observing the Europe around them, where more and more autocratic regimes or dictatorships were being established, felt compelled to study what constituted European civilization in greater depth. Colonialism was part of the Masonic horizon as well.78 Freemasons were not declared anti-colonialists, though some pleaded for the abolition of colonies. Several Masons worked in the administration of the French colonies, with some even serving as Minister of the Colonies (e.g. Gaston Doumergue or Léon Perrier).79 The mainstream idea was formulated in the “Bulletin Officiel” of January 1927 in an exposé published in preparation of the annual convention.80 Its topic was “Les colonies dans une démocratie”,81 and its approach was pragmatic, stating that Europeans needed raw materials they could find only in the colonies. A frequently used expression like “homme d’Europe” should not be interpreted to imply a deeper civilizational meaning. The basic position was summarized as follows: En raison des besoins de l’Europe, du manque de produits nécessaires à la vie actuelle, les colonies sont utiles. Les peuples, supérieurs par l’âge de leur civilisation et leurs moyens d’action, doivent apprendre aux peuples plus jeunes et inexpérimentés. Mais cette extension doit se faire en tenant compte des règles de vie principale des peuples subjugués, et aussi du climat et du sol. Par conséquent, de les diriger dans un sens d’amélioration physique et morale continus. De prévoir, pour l’avenir, l’assimilation complète avec les peuples devenus éduqués. Ces tendances sont conformes à ce que l’on pourrait appeler la Loi naturelle de la vie humaine : la direction par l’aîné. Elle est également conforme à la doctrine maçonnique qui nous régit. [Because of the needs of Europe, of the lack of products necessary for the current life, the colonies are useful. The peoples who are superior in the age of their civilization and their means of action must teach the younger and inexperienced peoples. But this expansion must be done taking into account the main rules of life of subjugated peoples, as well as those of climate and soil. Therefore, to direct them in a sense of continuous physical and moral improvement. To foresee, for the future, the complete assimilation with the educated peoples.

78 Odo, La Franc-Maçonnerie dans les colonies, op. cit. This book is also available in open access at http://emsomipy.free.fr/Colonies.Odo/21.Table.Matieres.htm (accessed 20 September 2018). Harland-Jacobs, Jessica (2014): Freemasonry and Colonialism. In: Bogdan/Snoek, eds., Handbook of Freemasonry, op. cit., p 439–460. 79 See list of “Ministres et secrétaires d’État en charge des Colonies ou de l’Outre-Mer”: http:// emsomipy.free.fr/Dico/zFmCelebres0cArt.Odo.htm (accessed 2 November 2017). 80 Similar conventions dealing with colonial issues and questions were held by the GODF in 1923 and Le Droit Humain in 1928; see Odo, La Franc-Maçonnerie dans les colonies, op. cit., p. 94. 81 GLDF Bibliothèque, Bulletin Officiel, 1927, No 43, exposé “Les colonies dans une démocratie”, p. 33–39.

46

II. Freemasons and the Idea of Europe in the 1920s and 1930s These tendencies conform to what might be called the natural law of human life: leadership by the eldest. It is also consistent with the Masonic doctrine that governs us.]82

As usual, the lodges were asked to discuss the topic and write reports communicating their ideas. Several reports were transmitted to the Conseil Fédéral in response to the exposé; they can be found in the GLDF archive.83 Lodge No 344 (L’Avenir) did not consider it a contradiction that a democratic state such as France had colonies. After all, advanced civilization had to help the less developed peoples. But which way would be the right one? The lodge wrote: Trois politiques s’offrent à elle (la Métropole ; W.S.), celle du refoulement, celle de l’assimilation, celle du protectorat, la seule digne d’une démocratie. [Three policies are available to it (the Metropolis; W.S.), that of repression, that of assimilation, that of the protectorate, the only one worthy of a democracy.] 84

It is interesting to see that L’Avenir rejected the concept of assimilation, instead preferring the concept of the protectorate as applied by the French Republic in Morocco, for example. It remained a concept pertaining to a winner over a vanquished entity, however: Reste la politique du protectorat. Nous pensons qu’elle est la seule qu’un peuple civilisé puisse employer avec succés [sic!] car elle concilie, la dignité du vainqueur et le respect au vaincu. Le protectorat, c’est la direction par l’aîné exerçant le rôle de tuteur, agissant en bon père de famille, avec cette condition essentielle : connaître à fond la mentalité des populations auxquelles on s’adresse (…). [There remains the policy of the protectorate. We believe that it is the only one a civilized people can successfully use because it reconciles the dignity of the victor and the respect for the vanquished. The protectorate is the direction of the elder acting as guardian, acting as a good father, with this essential condition: to know thoroughly the mentality of the populations to whom one speaks (…).]85

While this is an obviously paternalistic concept, racism is quite clearly rejected. And although the members of L’Avenir had France in mind, they often used the adjective “European”. Two treatises by lodge No 405 (Fidélité, from Paris) are likewise preserved. The first one is not signed, its authorship is presumably attributable to a collective,86 while the second one specifies “Gaston Weil” as its author – very likely the same Gaston Weil who was later a member of the Résistance and deported to the

82 GLDF Bibliothèque, Bulletin Officiel, 1927, No 43, exposé “Les colonies dans une démocratie”, p. 38. 83 GLDF Archives russes, Fonds 93, Opis 1, Boite 45. 84 GLDF Archives russes, Fonds 93, Opis 1, Boite 45, typewritten mémoire, 15 pages, by lodge No 344, L’Avenir, p. 12. The mémoire has no receipt stamp, which is unusual. It was probably received by the Conseil Fédéral in early July 1927. 85 GLDF Archives russes, Fonds 93, Opis 1, Boite 45, mémoire by lodge No 344, L’Avenir, p. 12–13. 86 GLDF Archives russes, Fonds 93, Opis 1, Boite 45, typewritten mémoire, 6 pages, by lodge No 405, Fidélité (handwritten addendum), receipt stamp 5 July 1927.

Masonic “United States of Europe”

47

concentration camp of Buchenwald.87 The collective acknowledged “defective methods” in colonialism but was convinced that it was nevertheless a good thing overall: La colonisation apparait [sic!] donc comme un devoir pour les nations civilisées. Celles-ci doivent jouer auprès de leurs soeurs [sic!] inférieures le rôle de guide et, beaucoup plus par persuasion que par violence, les amener à accepter avec reconnaissance les avantages d’une civilisation plus avancée. [Colonization appears therefore as a duty for civilized nations. They must play for their inferior sisters the role of guide and, much more by persuasion than by violence, lead them to accept with gratitude the advantages of a more advanced civilization.] 88

Gaston Weil adopted a more critical socialist stance in regard to the colonies, declaring that their historic end would be their independence. Meanwhile, the “European democracies” were to democratize the life of the indigenous populations and implement European labour and social standards.89 A similar goal was pursued by Louis Sylvestre, rapporteur of the lodge Les Ecossais du Tonkin in Hanoi,90 though he used “assimilation” as a keyword for that end. The difference between him and Weil is that Sylvestre did not plead for independence, instead arguing that the colonies should become an integral part of the French state. His belief in the French “mission civilisatrice”91 was extraordinarily strong.92 A similar opinion informed the reports by the lodge Anfa Lumière

87 GLDF Archives russes, Fonds 93, Opis 1, Boite 45, typewritten mémoire, 11 pages, by lodge No 405, Fidélité, receipt stamp 12 July 1927, with Gaston Weil marked as author. Concerning the identification of Gaston Weil as a member of the Résistance, see the homepage of “Patriam Recuperare”, list of names: http://www.patriam-recuperare.fr/Ceux_de_PR_O_Z.T.htm (accessed 10 September 2018); Weil is also mentioned in Kuby, Emma (2019): Political Survivors. The Resistance, the Cold War, and the Fight against Concentration Camps after 1945. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. 88 GLDF Archives russes, Fonds 93, Opis 1, Boite 45, mémoire by lodge No 405, Fidélité, last page. 89 GLDF Archives russes, Fonds 93, Opis 1, Boite 45, mémoire by lodge No 405, Fidélité, authored by Gaston Weil, last part (“Conclusion”). 90 On French Freemasonry in Indochina, see Dalloz, Jacques (2004): Francs-maçons d’Indochine à l’épreuve du régime Decoux. In: Outre-mers, vol. 91, No 342–343: Vichy et les colonies. p. 25–39, DOI: 10.3406/outre.2004.4080. Some lodges accepted indigenous persons as members. The article deals with the disbanding of the Masonic lodges by the Vichy regime. 91 “Civilizing missions” have been widely studied; see for instance Barth, Boris; Osterhammel, Jürgen, eds. (2005): Zivilisierungsmissionen. Imperiale Weltverbesserung seit dem 18. Jahrhundert. Konstanz. Weitz, Eric D. (2008): From the Vienna to the Paris System: International Politics and the Entangled Histories of Human Rights, Forced Deportations, and Civilizing Missions. In: American Historical Review, vol. 113, p. 1313–1343, DOI: 10.1086/ahr.113.5. 1313. 92 GLDF Archives russes, Fonds 93, Opis 1, Boite 45, typewritten mémoire, single-spaced, 22 pages, by lodge No 442, Les Ecossais du Tonkin; approved by the lodge on 26 April 1927, receipt stamp by Conseil Fédéral 13 June 1927.

48

II. Freemasons and the Idea of Europe in the 1920s and 1930s

(No 480, in Casablanca)93 and by Etienne Dégremont, rapporteur of lodge No 294. Dégremont stated: Les indigènes seront soumis aux mêmes loix que les habitants de la Métropole. C’est là une règle qui ne peut subir d’exception quand une Démocratie a pour devise : Liberté, Égalité, Fraternité. La colonie ne doit pas être asservie mais placée sur le même pied que la Démocratie. [The natives will be subject to the same laws as the inhabitants of the metropolis. This is a rule that cannot be subjected to exception when a democracy has the motto: Freedom, Equality, Fraternity. The colony must not be enslaved but placed on the same footing as the democracy.]94

At the convention, a certain brother Grossin was given the task of summarizing the elaborations of all the lodges and submitting a report to the convention. The latter adopted a declaration formulating the following as goals to be achieved: (…) une Nation démocratique doit compter au nombre de ses buts principaux l’émancipation intellectuelle et le progrès moral des peuples colonisés ; (…) cette émancipation doit avoir comme manifestation l’autonomie donnée à ces colonies et leur accession progressive à la Société des Nations (…) [(…) a democratic nation must include among its main goals the intellectual emancipation and moral progress of colonized peoples; (…) this emancipation must have as manifestation the autonomy given to these colonies and their progressive accession to the League of Nations (…)]

and, among a dozen further goals, que soit aussi vite que possible, étendue aux colonies l’application des principes des Droits de l’Homme. [that as soon as possible, the application of the principles of the Human Rights should be extended to the colonies.]95

The League of Nations and United States of Europe Masonry had (and continues to have) a global vision of itself and of humanity. It therefore placed its hope for universal peacemaking and understanding in the new League of Nations, founding the Fédération Internationale Maçonnique pour la Société des Nations.96 It also stipulated that the colonies should accede to the League of Nations, as we have seen in the previous subchapter. The GLDF 93 GLDF Archives russes, Fonds 93, Opis 1, Boite 45, typewritten mémoire, 7 pages, by lodge No 480, Anfa Lumière (Ordre de Casablanca), receipt stamp by Conseil Fédéral 16 July 1927. 94 GLDF Archives russes, Fonds 93, Opis 1, Boite 45, typewritten mémoire, 8 pages, by lodge No 294, author and rapporteur Etienne Dégremont; receipt stamp by Conseil Fédéral 28 May 1927, p. 3–4. 95 GLDF Archives russes, Fonds 93, Opis 1, Boite 45, imprint (probably proofs of the Bulletin Officiel). 96 See report by Kiefé, Robert: Die Internationale Freimaurer-Vereinigung für den Völkerbund. In: Wiener Freimaurer-Zeitung, 1926, No 7–9, p. 37.

Masonic “United States of Europe”

49

proposed the League of Nations as a subject matter for its conventions as early as 1921. Despite the universalistic approach of Masonry, however, the League of Nations was obviously considered from a very European perspective. A brief draft of the topic “La Franc-Maçonnerie et la Société des Nations”, published in the “Bulletin Officiel” of the GLDF in early 1922, states: La méthode naturelle et nécessaire d’organisation de la paix consiste donc à créer entre les Etats d’aujourd’hui une Société des Nations ou Fédérations des peuples, ou Etats-Unis d’Europe (Victor Hugo), ou plutôt du monde. [The natural and necessary method of organizing peace is therefore to create between the States of today a League of Nations or Federations of peoples, or United States of Europe (Victor Hugo), or rather of the world.] 97

This alternative of a League of Nations or a United States of Europe was maintained in the convention of 1922. Brother Lucien Le Foyer98 was assigned with preparing the summary of the material submitted for the convention by 31 lodges – and he reported in great detail, thereby providing us with a good impression of the diverging opinions among the lodges. For example, lodge No 38 supported the creation of a United States of Europe by the League of Nations while lodge No 415 expressed its hopes that the League might become a World Federation.99 Lodge No 354 (Accord Parfait) stated that a European spirit (“esprit européen”) needed to be created.100 The GLDF supported the idea of the League of Nations, but criticized its present constitution as defective and ruled by hidden imperialistic motives. Therefore, the convention requested the establishment of a “super-state” or “Sur-Etat” based on a democratic partition of the three powers. It demanded international civil and penal codes as well as a code for international procedures and an international army or police, and proposed that the disunited nations should undergo disarmament. Delegates to the general assembly or parliament of the “super-state” were to be elected directly by the people or at least by the national parliaments. Deputies should not be the agents of governments, and the majority rule instead of the unanimity rule should be applied to decision-making. Peace, diplomatic transparency, the right of peoples to self-determination, international free trade, stable exchange rates between currencies, labour legislation, pacifist education based on the use of an international language, creation of a European spirit and fostering of a “League of Nations patriotism” – these and other similar ideas were the key objectives of the League, and they were summed up in the aforementioned alternative goal: “la formation des Etats-Unis d’Europe, ou plutôt de la Fédération

97 GLDF Bibliothèque, Bulletin Officiel, 1922, p. 23. 98 Le Foyer was elected Grand Master in 1928 and 1929; see Combes, 1914–1968, op. cit., p. 38. 99 GLDF Bibliothèque, Bulletin Officiel, 1922, report by Le Foyer, p. 233. 100 GLDF Bibliothèque, Bulletin Officiel, 1922, report by Le Foyer, p. 234.

50

II. Freemasons and the Idea of Europe in the 1920s and 1930s

du Monde” [the formation of the United States of Europe, or rather of the World Federation].101 Indeed, examination of the League of Nations’ constitutional flaws seems pertinent because it scrutinizes the system behind the League and simultaneously shows how closely these faults resemble what is frequently criticized with regard to the European Union of today: blockades resulting from the unanimity requirement, permanent conflicts between intergovernmentalism and democracy, and a lack of EU patriotism and a European spirit. The notion of a “super-state” is presently being discussed more controversially than in the 1920s – and is commonly disapproved of. In other words, the evident systemic flaws have not been overcome in the century since the founding of the League of Nations. The convention of 1925 returned to the same question under the title of “La paix par la Société des Nations” [Peace by the League of Nations], approaching the problem in nearly the same way as had been the case three years earlier.102 The arguments generally remained the same as well. Three regional congresses were held in 1925 (for the régions Parisienne et d’Outre-Mer, Ouest and SudOuest). The lodges of the southwest region copiously reiterated their arguments of 1922 for the League of Nations to become a “Super Etat”. 103 This was reaffirmed once again during the annual convention on 18 September 1925.104 The “Bulletin Officiel” offered additional material to the Lodges that year, among them a mémoire written by brother Fernand Maurette of the lodge La Fidélité (Ordre de Lille) that had been awarded first place at the “Concours Français de la Paix” – a competition endowed with 200,000 francs by Edward Albert Filene (1860–1937), himself the author of a book dealing with Europe.105 The “Bulletin Officiel” of the GLDF reports that a total of 5,139 mémoires were submitted in 1925.106 Maurette (1878–1937) was an agrégé at the École Normale Supérieure in Paris and a well-known geographer. In 1924, he was appointed as director of the research division of the International Labour Organization.107 His treatise offered 101 GLDF Bibliothèque, Bulletin Officiel, 1922, conclusion adopted by the 1922 convention, p. 235–236. 102 GLDF Bibliothèque, Bulletin Officiel, 1925, No 32, outline for further study by the lodges, p. 165–166. 103 GLDF Bibliothèque, Bulletin Officiel, 1925, No 35, p. 321–326. The lodges of the region “Ouest” did the same, but their report on the topic of the League of Nations consists of only a few lines, p. 328. The same is true for the congress of the region “Parisienne et d’Outre-Mer”, p. 331. 104 GLDF Bibliothèque, separate print with handwritten marks “Compte-rendu analytique des Séances du Convent de 1925”, troisième séance (no pagination). 105 Filene, Edward A. (1925): Le problème européen et sa solution. Paris (original in English, French translation by Francis Delaisi, foreword by Paul Painlevé); see http://www.idref.fr/ 086851365 (accessed 17 November 2017). 106 GLDF Bibliothèque, Bulletin Officiel, 1925, No 32 (“Partie non officielle”), p. 187–200. The text was also published in L’Acacia, No 14, December 1924, p. 171–183. 107 See obituary notice: Dupuy, Paul; Gallois, Lucien (1938): Fernand Maurette (1878–1937). In: Annales de Géographie, vol. 47, p. 199–202, http://www.persee.fr/doc/geo_0003-4010_

Masonic “United States of Europe”

51

a comprehensive tour d’horizon, beginning with an examination of the question of reparations and debts. According to Maurette, this problem had to be treated under the terms of “justice” in “l’Europe nouvelle”. He pleaded for the creation of a “Société des Nations Européennes”, among whose task would be the settling of such reparations and debts. This League of European Nations would be the combined European voice the United States of America, Europe’s most important creditor, needed. In addition, the League should be empowered to fix exchange rates between the European countries, since the instability of the European currency system was a major obstacle for the continent’s economy. Thirdly, Maurette recommended the creation of three agencies to enhance economic growth, systematically collect and publish information on raw material stocks, and handle emigration. These agencies were likewise to be part of the European League of Nations. Other aspects addressed in the tract were the transport infrastructure in Europe, new borders and customs resulting from the creation of new states, and free trade. One chapter was dedicated to the current social crisis, with Maurette emphasizing the bleak situation of many intellectuals despite their significance for the development of civilization. The fostering of intelligence and education, he asserted, would therefore also benefit the European League of Nations. Two chapters dealt with economic and political insecurity, and it was here that Maurette proposed developing the European League of Nations towards what was referred to as a “super-state” in other texts – a term he himself did not use in his mémoire. He did however stipulate the establishment of a European army under the control of the European League of Nations. Finally, Maurette discussed moral aspects. Some countries, he argued – especially those that had been neutral in the war and had not suffered from or had even been enriched by it – should demonstrate solidarity with the damaged countries. He called for the creation of a European and international spirit, with one possible approach being to enhance exchange programs. Maurette sharply criticized nationalism, but saw no contradiction between a European and the respective national spirits. He proposed that the European League of Nations should create a “Bureau de la Vérité” to counteract the spread of what we call “fake news” today. He also suggested that all European countries including Russia should be allowed to be members of the European League. In his conclusion, Maurette stated that the European League should be part of the Universal League of Nations, but this assertion appears more like an addition due to the demands of political correctness in the 1920s. In the last paragraph, he described his notion of the European League of Nations as a “draft version” of a United States of Europe. During the convention, a brother by the last name of Reinhold was charged with delivering the report compiled by the Commission de la Paix par la Société des Nations.108 The paper had a length of 18 printed pages plus 6 pages of 1938_num_47_266_11843. Extensive bibliography: http://www.idref.fr/03204691X (accessed 17 November 2017). 108 GLDF Bibliothèque, Bulletin Officiel, 1925, No 36–37, p. 49–67, discussion p. 67–73.

52

II. Freemasons and the Idea of Europe in the 1920s and 1930s

discussion, and began with a historic outline of the idea of international arbitration and law with regard to the peaceful organization of the European states, referring to various well-known names: the Frenchman Pierre Dubois in 1306, the Czech King Podiebrad and the French Duke of Sully, to whom it attributed the idea of a “Confédération des Etats Européens”. It also quoted the Frenchmen Eméric Crucé and Abbé de Saint-Pierre as well as – in that order – the Dutchman “Grossius” (Hugo Grotius), the German “Lilienfels” (Jakob Heinrich von Lilienfeld), the Frenchman Jean-Jacques Rousseau, the German “Kent” (Immanuel Kant), the Englishman Jeremy Bentham, the Swiss Johann Caspar Bluntschli and Victor Hugo from France.109 The report suggested considering the Holy Alliance (1815/16)110 and the German Confederation among the presumed predecessors of the League of Nations, and its historic overview ended with the Peace Congress suggested by Tsar Nicholas II in 1898 (which was effectively held in The Hague in 1899 and followed by another in 1907, also in The Hague), Anglo-American peace movements and President Wilson’s initiative for a League of Nations at the end of World War I. The second part of the report summarized the many papers submitted by the various lodges, which showed that the League of Nations constituted a topic of significant importance for many brothers who hoped for “arbitration”, “security” and “disarmament”. Although there were also some deviating opinions, the GLDF supported the League of Nations and provided plentiful advice on how to improve it. The GODF likewise issued a statement backing the idea of a United States of Europe under the auspices of the League of Nations at its own convention in 1924.111 The GLDF convention of 1926 returned once more to the question of war and peace, asking how war could be avoided in the future. More than 40 lodges and four regional congresses sent studies and reports to Paris in the run-up to the convention.112 There was a consensus that peace education and moral disarmament – one of the most important topics in public discussions at the time 113 – represented the sine qua non for successful avoidance of wars. Economic co-operation and free trade were also considered to work in favour of peace, and a United States of Europe was thought to be a natural result of free trade, the abolition of national economic rivalry, and the capitalist system. Some lodges predicted that colonialism would vanish for the same reasons. The necessary democratization of the League of Nations was also referred to frequently. Most Masons believed in the force of law and in institutions like the International Court in The Hague. 109 As an overview in English of historic plans for Europe from the continent and England, see Heater, Derek (1992): The Idea of European Unity. London. 110 See as a recent synthesis Schubert, Anselm; Pyta, Wolfram, eds. (2018): Die Heilige Allianz. Entstehung – Wirkung – Rezeption. Interdisziplinäre Tagung. Stuttgart. 111 L’Acacia, No 15, January 1925, supplement “Sous le Triangle”, p. 3. 112 GLDF Bibliothèque, Compte-rendu analytique des Séances du Convent de 1926, p. 266–276 (the compte-rendu is bound together with the Bulletin Officiel of 1926). 113 See chapter III on the human rights leagues.

Masonic “United States of Europe”

53

Generally speaking, this reiterated opinions that had already been voiced by the international peace movement for three decades or more, as Gaston Moch remarked in the discussion on the report.114 Several lodges criticized the negative consequences of Christian individualism and juxtaposed it to the benefits of collectivism and solidarity. This obviously echoed a speech delivered by Charles Riandey on 20 December 1925 during the celebration of the “Fête de l’Ordre Écossais” by the GLDF. Its GrandSecrétaire Riandey delivered the ceremonial speech, for which he chose European civilization as the main topic.115 He stated that European civilization was essentially Christian for historic reasons, then proceeded to castigate the supposed individualism on which Christianism was based and which could not respond to the challenges of the present time. He contrasted the concept of the group (i.e. society) and group solidarity with this supposed Christian individualism, referring specifically to Auguste Comte and Friedrich Nietzsche. The concept of solidarity arose during the French Revolution and was elaborated by the early socialists and Saint-Simonianists. In France, it became a key concept closely tied to the labour movement and socialist parties.116 Riandey’s strong criticism of Christianism reflected the anti-clerical and irreligious position of French Freemasonry (and of the GLDF in particular) and obviously had an impact on various lodges contributing to the intellectual preparation of the 1926 convention. Franco-German Reconciliation and Europe A major topic not only for Freemasons was Franco-German reconciliation, which had been an ongoing issue since the war of 1870/71. Freemasons understood very well that the continuous Franco-German confrontation was not only threatening peace in Europe, but also causing an arms race in other parts of the world that were closely connected to Europe (e.g. the USA and the “Orient”).117 After World War I, the process of reconciliation gained momentum when the League of Nations began its work, benefitting from the initial sympathy or even enthusiasm for its existence. In an article penned in 1923 that dealt with German Masonry, Maurice Monier, Grand Master of the GLDF, referred back to Jules Ferry in 1887: According to Monier, the “rapprochement franco-allemand” for which Ferry had

114 GLDF Bibliothèque, Compte-rendu analytique des Séances du Convent de 1926, p. 275. 115 GLDF Bibliothèque, Bulletin Officiel, 1926, No 38, Partie non officielle, p. 24–33. In the 1950s, Riandey will be Grand Chancellor; see Combes, 1914–1968, op. cit., p. 141–143. 116 On the history of the concept of solidarity in Europe, see Schmale, Wolfgang (2017): European Solidarity: A Semantic History. In: European Review of History, vol. 24, p. 854–873, DOI: 10.1080/13507486.2017.1345869 (open access). 117 Conti, La Franc-maçonnerie et le mouvement pour la paix, op. cit., § 21 (Conti quotes brother Le Foyer). On Freemasons and pacifism, see also Martín, Luis P. (2000): Le pacifisme et la franc-maçonnerie dans l’Europe de l’entre-deux-guerres. In: Martín, Les francs-maçons dans la cité, op. cit., p. 165–178.

54

II. Freemasons and the Idea of Europe in the 1920s and 1930s

fought was akin to a “prélude à la constitution des Etats-Unis d’Europe” [prelude to the constitution of the United States of Europe].118 In 1925, the GODF asked its lodges to study and write on the relationship between France and Germany. The results agreed that the collaboration with various associations had developed in a satisfactory manner, with the French and German Leagues for Human Rights explicitly mentioned as examples.119 But Masonic reconciliation actually appeared be more difficult than that in other areas. Monier detailed the situation in his speech given on the occasion of the “Fête de l’Ordre Écossais” on 19 December 1926. He suggested that French Freemasons should take the first step towards reconciliation with their German brothers, and that German Masonry should become a member of the Association Maçonnique Internationale. Masonic reconciliation between Germans and French would likely work as a lead-in to a United States of Europe.120 The convention of 1924 studied the question of Franco-German reconciliation or at least mutual approach in depth.121 Forty lodges and three regional congresses had studied the issue and provided the Commission du Rapprochement FrancoAllemand with ample material. Gaston Weil reported on the results.122 With a single exception, all lodges were in favour of the rapprochement and wished it to be embedded in the work of the League of Nations. The lodge Le Réveil Maçonnique argued for the creation of the United States of Europe as the sole instrument to end Franco-German conflicts. Other lodges strongly supported the idea of a United States of Europe as well, often viewing it as a precursor to a United States of the World. Further elements of the idea of Europe were provided by various lodges, e.g. the introduction of an inter-European militia instead of national armies, the introduction of a joint single currency, the abolishment of the passport and visa regime, etc. In his report, brother Weil referred to the 1913 convention, which had already addressed the problem of Franco-German relations and declared that politics and – first and foremost – peacekeeping efforts in Europe depended heavily on the quality of this relationship, which had reached a ruinous state in 1913. 123 As was the case during the years following World War II, the Franco-German understanding was seen as a precondition for European understanding and eventual unity.

118 GLDF Bibliothèque, Bulletin Officiel, 1923, No 24, Maurice Monier: “La Franc-Maçonnerie Allemande et nous”, p. 161–164, quotation p. 162. 119 L’Acacia, No 17, March 1925, supplement “Sous le Triangle”, p. 4. 120 GLDF Bibliothèque, Bulletin Officiel, 1927, No 44, p. 96–100. 121 The French initiative was well received by the Großloge von Wien; see article by brother Béla: Zwei Jahre vor Genf und Thoiry. In: Wiener Freimaurer-Zeitung, 1926, No 11, p. 17– 20. 122 GLDF Bibliothèque, Bulletin Officiel, 1924, No 31, p. 46–60, 73–77 (report and discussion). 123 L’Acacia, No 6 – June 1913, reproduction of “Un Manifeste des partis Socialistes Allemand et Français pour la Paix”, p. 388–390.

Masonic “United States of Europe”

55

The Convention of 1933 – “Statut de l’Europe de demain” The 1933 GLDF convention (20–24 September 1933) defined the “Statut de l’Europe de demain” (Statute for the Europe of Tomorrow) as its main topic, but also debated Hitler and the persecution of Jews in Germany.124 Hitler’s rise to power could only demoralize people planning for the future of Europe. The convention of 1934 would continue this debate by dealing with the question whether democratic principles, methods and institutions needed to be adapted to the present situation, the better to resist the authoritarian temptation. The convention of 1933 was unique in that the topic of the future Europe was to be discussed together with the Grand Symbolic Lodge of Germany. This proposition had been made by Grand Master Jacques Maréchal, and a conference together with the German Grand Symbolic Lodge had been held in Paris in 1932. A second planned meeting in Berlin could not take place.125 Franco-German understanding and reconciliation were among the most important topics dealt with by the GLDF over the course of nearly a decade – which corresponded to a general tendency in France, as we will see in the next chapter on the human rights leagues. In fact, the idea had originally gone much further, namely to discuss the matter at the international level of Freemasonry.126 As usual, the GLDF addressed a preliminary note – this time translated into German, with the French version to be published in the “Bulletin Officiel” – to its German brothers. The plan envisaged the two Grand Lodges debating the topic before sharing and co-ordinating their conclusions. The political developments in Germany forestalled the execution of this plan, however.127 Rapporteur Charles Riandey noted that 97 member lodges of the GLDF had submitted reports of varying quality and depth to the commission charged with the preparation of the topic and its presentation at the convention. Riandey presented the commission’s conclusion based on the local reports to the convention. The lodges of the southern region had met for a regional congress, their twenty-second, on 15–17 April 1933. Brother H. Delbosc, deputy to the congress for the lodge Solidarité Lyonnaise, summarized the results.128 The regional congress went further than the national congress would later on, postulating a United States of Europe, constituted as a republic, to be ruled by a Supreme Council whose

124 See GLDF Archives, Convent 1933, four boxes. No particular number or signature. Additional material is to be found in GLDF Archives russes, Fonds 93, Opis 1, Boite 49A. 125 GLDF Archives, Convent 1933: Ouverture de la convention de 1933, by Grand Master Jacques Maréchal, 20 September 1933, 10 a.m. Typewritten manuscript, here p. 4. 126 GLDF Archives, Convent 1933, Compte rendu officiel, closing speech by Grand-Orateur Georges Chadirat, p. 247. 127 GLDF Archives, Convent 1933, separate printing: Grande Loge de France, Compte rendu officiel des Travaux de la Grande Loge. Convent de 1933, p. 235, report by brother C. Riandey. 128 GLDF Archives, Convent 1933, 5 handwritten pages, signed by Delbosc.

56

II. Freemasons and the Idea of Europe in the 1920s and 1930s

members were to be elected by the peoples of the countries forming the republic. The Supreme Council would have access to police forces and should communicate in a universally spoken language (namely Esperanto). Europe should use a single currency, and its media should be independent and follow the humanitarian ideal. Freemasonry would be a constructive supporter of this Europe of tomorrow. The call for submissions regarding this notion of Europe as published in the “Bulletin Officiel”129 included several fundamentals. It began with a preamble before addressing the fields of politics, economics and society, then ended with a note and a brief bibliography. The preamble asserted that there was a consensus that the world had fallen into chaos for a number of reasons: war, chauvinism, trusts, imbecility, egoism, a public opinion influenced by certain media (“presse d’affaires”), vain politicians and politicians guided by occult forces. These were universal evils which, in the following, were to be considered only in the context of Europe. Brother Charles Riandey would later criticize the title “Statut de l’Europe de demain” as being inappropriate in a letter written to the Grand-Secrétaire on 21 October 1933, since it dealt with a global question and the conclusions presented by the convention contained no specific European issues. The title was not changed, however. The call for submissions went on to address the field of politics. Although there were only two main forms of government present in Europe, it stated – namely the republic and the monarchy – these forms appeared in variants as divergent as one could imagine. The French Republic was closer to the Belgian form of monarchy than to the German Republic. Attempts should be made to harmonize these governmental forms as much as possible. Next, the text addressed the issue of racism, language prejudices and ethnic minorities within the nation state. Before a European Federation could be realized, it would be necessary to guarantee an untroubled way of life for these minorities. The final question was whether a revision of the peace treaties should also be considered. Concerning economics, the Masons and lodges were urged to investigate what was keeping the European economy from flourishing and what benefits free trade and the abolishment of customs could offer. What about a global currency? With regard to society, they were expected to deal with public education and the media. The call for submissions commended a co-ordinated international education system with harmonized contents (an anti-nationalistic position), pleading in favour of improving and expanding exchange programs for the youth. The media were criticized for their partisan and partial behaviour serving only specific interests.

129 GLDF Archives, Convent 1933, separate print and identical typewritten version “Le Statut de l’Europe de demain. L’Organisation de l’Europe (Etude critique et constructive)”. Further correspondence reveals that the authors of the study must have been Grand Master Jacques Maréchal and Grand-Orateur Georges Chadirat (who was elected Grand Master in 1949, see Combes, 1914–1968, op. cit., p. 138). See ibid., letter by Grand-Secrétaire to Grand Master, 13 October (1933?).

Masonic “United States of Europe”

57

The bibliography listed 34 items, including books such as Bertrand de Jouvenel’s “Vers les Etats-Unis d’Europe” (1930), Edouard Herriot’s “Europe” (1930)130, Edgar Stern-Rubarth’s “Stresemann, l’Européen” (1932)131, DavidJacques [sic!] (David Jayne) Hill’s “La reconstruction de l’Europe” (1918) and Anatole Leroy-Beaulieu’s “Les Etats-Unis de l’Europe” (1901)132. The conclusion133 proposed to the convention posited that one should begin with a fundamental charter listing paramount moral principles for Europe: No distinction of human beings based on race, nation, religion or social class. All human beings are brothers, and their differences should be resolved only by applying pacifistic methods. The GLDF was convinced that all issues and conflicts would be resolvable following in-depth study of the underlying problems. Law and justice were to rule the world, not nationalism. The conclusion also asserted the right to work for every human, and that no one should be discriminated with regard to the benefits provided to mankind by natural resources and technical progress. The current civilization was in danger and needed to be preserved from violence and dictatorship. The GLDF was also convinced that problems between states could be mediated and resolved by the League of Nations. It saw an international economic interdependency that precluded nationalistic solutions, and thought that democracy should be adapted to present exigencies so as to be better able to resist the temptations of dictatorship. As one can see, the stipulated principles were indeed grand ones based on a moral view of politics, economics, international relations and the human being. Concrete measures were not proposed, however – with the exception of one reference to the League of Nations and the use of Art. 19 of its covenant.134 Even though the intended co-operation with the Grand Symbolic Lodge of Germany could not be realized due to the political circumstances under Hitler in 1933, the convention held in the same year was attended by various Freemasons representing foreign lodges. Grand Master Daubenfeld of the Grande Loge du Luxembourg held a speech during the concluding session in which he likewise addressed the present state of Europe, apparently sharing the views of the GLDF.135 Daubenfeld attributed a leading role within the Europe of his time to French civilization and French Masonry. 130 German translation under “Vereinigte Staaten von Europa”, Leipzig 1930. 131 French translation of German “Stresemann, der Europäer”, Berlin 1930. 132 Subtitle: “Congrès des sciences politiques de 1900”, Paris 1901 (Publication de la Société des Anciens Elèves et Elèves de l’Ecole Libre de Sciences Politiques). 133 GLDF Archives, Convent 1933, printed Compte rendu of convent 1933, op. cit., p. 236–238; discussion p. 238–239. Typewritten manuscript of the conclusion in GLDF Archives russes, Fonds 93, Opis 1, Boite 49A. 134 “The Assembly may from time to time advise the reconsideration by Members of the League of treaties which have become inapplicable and the consideration of international conditions whose continuance might endanger the peace of the world.” Art. 19 of the Covenant of the League of Nations, http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/leagcov.asp#art19 (accessed 3 November 2017). 135 Compte rendu of convent 1933, op. cit., p. 264.

58

II. Freemasons and the Idea of Europe in the 1920s and 1930s

The Conseil Fédéral of the GLDF decreed in its meeting on 23 November 1933 that the resolution adopted by the convention on the charter for future Europe should be printed. It decided to print no less than 200,000 copies.136

136 GLDF Archives, Convention 1933, one typewritten leaf, dated 23 November 1933, Conseil Fédéral. I was unable to verify whether the 200,000 copies were actually printed but GLDF and GODF seem to have been used with such numbers; examples are given by Combes, 1914–1968, op. cit., p. 32–34.

III. HUMAN RIGHTS LEAGUES AND THE IDEA OF EUROPE DURING THE INTERWAR PERIOD INTRODUCTION: FRENCH LEADERSHIP In 1922, the Ligue Internationale des Droits de l’Homme et du Citoyen (hereafter LIDH) was founded in Paris. It held an international congress in Brussels in 1926 that dealt primarily with the topic of “United States of Europe”. The LIDH is usually known under its alternative name, Fédération Internationale des Ligues des Droits de l’Homme et du Citoyen (hereafter FIDH).1 The French Ligue des Droits de l’Homme et du Citoyen (hereafter LDH)2, founded in 1898 for the defence of Captain Dreyfus, was the driving force behind its establishment, assisted by the German and other leagues that had been founded in the meantime. The objective of the national leagues as well as of the LIDH (or FIDH) was to defend human rights, democracy and human dignity – goals that could not be separated from the idea of a united Europe nor from the idea of a unity of humankind. The human rights leagues were mainly concerned with violations of human rights within their own countries. For criteria, they referred to the French “Déclaration des droits de l’homme et du citoyen” of August 1789, with the French LDH also explicitly referring to the revised 1793 version of the “Déclaration”. The International League provided a framework for joint resolutions addressing human rights violations in countries represented by a national league or having no league of human rights at all. National leagues would sometimes also concern

1

2

I will use the abbreviation LIDH throughout this book. In the “Cahiers des Droits de l’Homme”, the official organ of the LDH that also published information on the International League, the LIDH was sometimes also called Fédération Internationale even before it officially renamed itself to Fédération to distinguish itself from the American International League for the Rights of Man in New York. The history of the French league from 1898 to 1940 was written by Naquet, Pour l’humanité, op. cit. See also Irvine, William D. (2007): Between Justice and Politics. The Ligue des droits de l’homme, 1898–1945. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press. Still useful are the exhibition catalogue and its essays: Manceron, Gilles; Rebérioux, Madeleine, eds. (2004): Droits de l’homme – Combats du siècle. Nanterre – Paris. The league’s history since 1945 has been studied by Agrikoliansky, Éric (2002): La Ligue française des droits de l’homme et du citoyen depuis 1945. Sociologie d’un engagement civique. Paris (Logiques politiques). See also Claveau, Cylvie (2000): L’Autre dans les Cahiers des Droits de l’Homme, 1920–1940. Une sélection universaliste de l’altérité à la Ligue des Droits de l’Homme et du Citoyen en France. Montréal (Ph.D. thesis, McGill University, http://digitool.library.mcgill.ca/R/?func=dbinjump-full&object_id=37604, open access). Research on the postwar league will be enhanced now that the postwar archive has been brought into order and made accessible by the BDIC. Generally speaking, research on the French league is especially abundant.

60

III. Human Rights Leagues and the Idea of Europe During the Interwar Period

themselves with problems in the country of a sister league; this could lead to controversies between the leagues. The French LDH regularly reacted to human rights issues all over the world, often in connection with LDH chapters in the French colonies and protectorates or with reference to the universal character of the Declaration of Human Rights in regard to other countries such as the USA and its imperialism. In fact, there was no clear borderline between what was within the competence of the LIDH on the one hand and in that of the LDH on the other. The LDH was the spiritus rector of the LIDH. The history of the LIDH still remains to be written.3 Generally speaking, the idea fit in well with the new international context backed by the League of Nations. The sheer existence of the League of Nations proved to be beneficial for the creation of supporting associations, which often united their national chapters in an international umbrella federation. The best example of this was the International Federation of League of Nations Societies, whose organizational roots go back to the First World War and the fundamental idea of a League of Nations.4 The advantage of these civil society associations was that they could be established at the national level even before the respective country itself joined the League of Nations – as was the case in Germany, for instance. And even if a country officially left the League of Nations, individuals from that country could continue their collaboration in one of the commissions, committees or subcommittees. The same principles applied to the LIDH: The Austrian League for Human Rights was only established as late as 1926, but its leading figure Rudolf Goldscheid informed the LIDH congress in 1923 that “we will set to work in Austria to spread the ideas of the Declaration of Human Rights, we will keep you informed of the development of public opinion in our country, and we will work with all of you to destroy the belief in the creative force of violence.” 5 For a few years, there were also delegates to the LIDH from England and the USA even though these countries did not succeed in establishing human rights leagues of their own under the roof of the LIDH. Instead, they proceeded independently. The League of Nations, its commissions and committees, and the numerous associations supporting its activity provided to the international public a frame3

4

5

Outline by Manceron, Gilles (2017): The French Ligue des droits de l’homme’s Interest in International Issues from 1898 to the 1980s. Founding and Supporting the Fédération internationale des droits de l’homme. In: Schmale/Treiblmayr, eds., Human Rights Leagues, op. cit., p. 45–77. The cited volume introduces its readers to the history of the following human rights leagues besides the LIDH/FIDH: Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Luxemburg, Poland, Rumania, Bulgaria, Spain, Switzerland, Turkey. Chapters on the Portuguese and Czechoslovakian leagues were intended but could not be realized. Some information on them is to be found in the introduction by Schmale/Treiblmayr. See Guieu, Jean-Michel (2012): La SDN et ses organisations de soutien dans les années 1920. Entre promotion de l’esprit de Genève et volonté d’influence. In: Relations internationales, No 151, p. 11–23, DOI: 10.3917/ri.151.0011. Treiblmayr, The Austrian League for Human Rights, op. cit., p. 227 and footnote 14.

Introduction: French Leadership

61

work of subject matters that likely also had an impact on the topics dealt with by the human rights leagues and the LIDH. Children’s rights, 6 the rights of refugees, the topic of hygiene and many others were explored by committees of the League of Nations, by League associations and by the LDH and LIDH. Reading the “Cahiers des Droits de l’Homme”, which will be analysed below, provides a good impression of this parallelism owed to the existing networks of persons and associations as well as to the accumulation of memberships by certain individuals. In the case of the LDH, it should be noted that it played a part in the propagation of a Société des Nations in 1917 and that its activity was decisive in the French context.7 The International League benefitted from two very capable secretaries general, Aline Ménard-Dorian (1850–1929, secretary general in 1923–1929) and her successor Milly Zirker (1888–1971). Zirker had worked as secretary to Carl von Ossietzky before being exiled to Paris.8 The idea to create a French association for the promotion of a league of nations was arguably hatched in Ménard-Dorian’s salon.9 Some similarities are apparent between Aline Ménard-Dorian and Aline de Saint-Hubert, the wife of Emile Mayrisch and founder of the League for the Defence of the Women’s Interests.10 She had built up a network of relations to and between German and French intellectuals even before the First World War and regularly invited people to meetings at Colpach, home of the Mayrisch couple from 1920. The Office Franco-Allemand d’Information et de Documentation, which became involved in the debate on European union, owed its establishment

6

See for instance Droux, Joëlle (2012/2013): La tectonique des causes humanitaires: concurrences et collaborations autour du Comité de protection de l’enfance de la Société des Nations (1880–1940). In: Relations internationales, No 151, p. 77–90, DOI: 10.3917/ri.151.0077. Droux does not discuss the contribution of human rights leagues. 7 Guieu, Jean-Michel (2008): Le rameau et le glaive. Les militants français pour la Société des nations. Paris, p. 42 et seq. 8 Biography written by Quetting, Michael (2007): Journalistin und Organisatorin, Friedensaktivistin und Nazigegnerin, die Nobelpreismacherin: Milly Zirker 1888–1971, open access: https://www.rosalux.de/fileadmin/ls_saar/image/veranstaltungen/Milly_Zirker_Datei.pdf (accessed 10 September 2018). 9 Guieu, Le rameau et le glaive, op. cit., p. 43. 10 For a brief biography, see Mersch, Jules, ed. (1963): Biographie nationale du pays de Luxembourg, vol. 12. Luxembourg, p. 471–476. Bibliothèque nationale de Luxembourg: Luxemburgensia online, http://www.luxemburgensia.bnl.lu/cgi/luxonline1_2.pl?action=fv&sid= luxbio&vol=12&page=471 (accessed 10 September 2018).

62

III. Human Rights Leagues and the Idea of Europe During the Interwar Period

largely to these meetings and discussions in Colpach.11 The Office met for the first time on 29 May 1926 in Luxemburg under the presidency of Mayrisch.12 There must have been abundant correspondence in the years of MénardDorian and Zirker’s secretaryships, but unfortunately only vestiges of it appear to have been preserved.13 They received letters from all affiliated leagues as well as from other organizations – primarily peace associations like the League for the Rights of Man in Tel Aviv, which was affiliated with the National Council for Civil Liberties in London, or the Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom. More than fifty organizations and associations appearing in the LIDH correspondence could be enumerated. The LIDH organized several international congresses between 1922 and 1937, with reports on them published in the “Cahiers des Droits de l’Homme” – which was the official organ of the LDH but also published news related to the International League, which did not have a periodical of its own. A number of human rights leagues had been created in exile (Italy, Armenia, Russia, Egypt, etc.), and others had to cease their activities and become exile chapters due to the rise of the National Socialist and fascist systems in the 1930s. The majority of these exile chapters operated from Paris. In late 1930s, however, the French government tightened the laws for the control of foreigners, which restrained the exile leagues’ activities and caused their traces in the “Cahiers” to decrease. The report on the international LIDH congress in 1937 in Paris – Paris also hosted the World Exposition in the same year – was still published in the “Cahiers” in 1938. Between 1938/1939 and 1948, the International League seems not to have been active, as there are no traces of it in archival material or in the “Cahiers”. One of the last preserved documents from this period is a letter written to Émile Kahn, secretary general of the LDH from 1932 to 1953, by “Un groupe d’Albanais” and dated 20 October 193914, but one may doubt whether this was a sign of life of the LIDH. It was eventually reconstituted in 1948.15 I will examine 11 See Burgard, Oliver (2000): Das gemeinsame Europa – von der politischen Utopie zum außenpolitischen Programm. Meinungsaustausch und Zusammenarbeit pro-europäischer Verbände in Deutschland und Frankreich, 1924–1933. Frankfurt am Main, p. 31–32. On the “maison Mayrisch”, see Durosay, Daniel (1986): Paris-Berlin, via Luxembourg. Un relais dans les relations franco-allemandes de la NRF: la maison des Mayrisch. In: Bulletin des Amis d’André Gide, No 69, p. 33–56. 12 Burgard, Das gemeinsame Europa, op. cit., p. 57. See also Bock, Hans Manfred (1994): Kulturelle Eliten in den deutsch-französischen Gesellschaftsbeziehungen der Zwischenkriegszeit. In: Hudemann, Rainer; Soutou, Georges-Henri, eds.: Eliten in Deutschland und Frankreich im 19. und 20. Jahrhundert. Strukturen und Beziehungen, vol. 1, Munich, p. 73–91 (passim). 13 See BDIC, especially F delta res 0798/54 – F delta res 0798/60. Several contemporary document inventories dating to the 1920s and 1930s give the impression that while correspondence must have been abundant, most documents have seemingly been lost or were confiscated by the Gestapo or Soviet authorities. 14 BDIC, F delta res 0798/58, portfolio Albanian league. 15 See Schmale/Treiblmayr, Human Rights Leagues and Civil Society, op. cit., p. 197 and footnote 31.

Introduction: French Leadership

63

the International League and the various national leagues in more detail later in this chapter. The French domination over the LIDH was nothing special: France was able to apply its cultural supremacy in various regards during the interwar period. When its former enemy Austria – in a disastrous situation at the time – asked the League of Nations for help in 1923, Henry de Jouvenel, a leading French activist for the League, said that now s’achève la victoire qui ne devient définitive que lorsque les vainqueurs ont gagné les vaincus aux principes de leur civilisation [the victory will be completed that becomes final only when the victors have won the vanquished for the principles of their civilization]. 16

France played a leading role in European intellectual life during this period, and to some extent even dominated it by means of its members and delegates to various commissions and committees of the League of Nations. It also attempted to assume intellectual control of the International Federation of League of Nations Societies17: The secretary general of the Federation from 1921 to 193918 was Théodore Ruyssen, a well-known French pacifist who had initially presided over the Association pour la paix par le droit founded in Nîmes in 1887.19 The British League of Nations Union was the largest society within the Federation with between 400,000 and around 650,000 members,20 however, and French influence was thus not unrestricted. On the other hand, Albert Einstein left the International Commission on Intellectual Co-operation after becoming more and more sceptical about its internationalism. He considered it too French.21 As mentioned above, the preponderance of French discourses – which this chapter naturally reflects as well – was owed to French cultural predominance or supremacy during the interwar years. The agents of this predominance – French intellectuals, academics and politicians – were filled with idealism concerning France’s cultural mission. Célestin Bouglé (1870–1940) published a booklet in 1920 that was addressed to foreign students being educated at French universities and entitled “Qu’est-ce que l’esprit français? Vingt définitions choisies et 16 17 18 19 20

Quoted by Guieu, Le rameau et le glaive, op. cit., p. 79. Guieu, La SDN et ses organisations, op. cit., p. 13, 61. Guieu, La SDN et ses organisations, op. cit., p. 14. Guieu, Le rameau et le glaive, op. cit., p. 23. Guieu, La SDN et ses organisations, op. cit., p. 14. Guieu, Le rameau et le glaive, op. cit., p. 95. On the League of Nations Union, see Birn, Donald S. (1981): The League of Nations Union. 1918–1945. Oxford. 21 See Canales, Jimena (2005): Einstein, Bergson, and the Experiment that Failed. Intellectual Cooperation at the League of Nations. In: Modern Language Notes, vol. 120, p. 1168–1191, DOI: 10.1353/mln.2006.0005, p. 1180–1183, subchapter “The CIC experiment”. Other explanations for why Einstein left the Commission exist as well, see Scholz, Werner (1996): Das deutsch-französische Verhältnis in den internationalen Kulturorganisationen der Zwischenkriegszeit. In: Baechler, Christian; Müller, Klaus-Jürgen, eds.: Les tiers dans les relations franco-allemandes / Dritte in den deutsch-französischen Beziehungen. Munich, p. 215– 223.

64

III. Human Rights Leagues and the Idea of Europe During the Interwar Period

annotées”. It was based on “Cours de civilisation française à l’usage des étudiants étrangers – Lettres – Droit. Sessions d’hiver et d’été 1920–1921”. Bouglé may serve as an example for French cosmopolitan Europeans.22 He was a student of Émile Durkheim, a sociologist and philosopher (philosophie sociale), professor at Sorbonne and Directeur adjoint of the École Normale Supérieure (director 1935–1940), one of the vice-presidents of the LDH and head of its Commission Féministe. He was also a member of the Organisation professionnelle internationale pour la défense des libertés académiques et des droits des savants alongside Victor Basch (see below) and others, and collaborated with the Institut International de Coopération Intellectuelle, which had been established in support of the International Commission on Intellectual Co-operation23 (ICIC, a League of Nations advisory organization) and figures frequently among the correspondence partners of the LDH and LIDH. The ICIC is generally viewed as a precursor of UNESCO. Bouglé also collaborated with the Commission d’éducation du Congrès de l’Union Internationale des Associations pour la Société des Nations, cooperated closely with Max Horkheimer and was once invited for dinner by Arnold Toynbee. He communicated intensively with various academic institutes in Eastern Europe and the Balkans as well as with Peiping Yenkioyuen, the Académie Nationale de Peiping (Chine) [sic!]24. The European Centre of the Carnegie Foundation asked him to contribute to its review “Esprit International”.25 One could continue listing Bouglé’s involvements, but the above should suffice to make the point. In his booklet, Bouglé quotes famous French authors from the eighteenth, nineteenth and twentieth centuries (including Montesquieu, Rivarol, Madame de Staël, Victor Considérant, Michelet, Quinet, Taine, Renan, Lavisse, Bergson and others) to explain the nature of the French esprit. The thrust of the book is best expressed by chapter 18, “Idéal français et idéal humain”, which consists of a quote from Alfred Croiset’s “discours prononcé à l’ouverture des conférences de la Faculté des lettres de l’Université de Paris, le 5 novembre 1914”, a speech given after the outbreak of the First World War. Croiset said:26 22 Fonds Célestin Bouglé, BDIC, F delta res 852. The holding was donated to BDIC by Mademoiselle Bouglé in June 1980 (notice inventory BDIC). Information on Bouglé and his role in sociology is easy to find in studies on the history of sociology; see Ravelet, Claude, ed. (2008): Trois Figures de l’Ecole Durkheimienne: Célestin Bouglé, Georges Davy, Paul Fauconnet. Turin. A brief study on Bouglé’s academic biography and his scientific work is provided in Policar, Alain (2009): Célestin Bouglé. Paris. An open-access selection of books written by Bouglé is offered at http://classiques.uqac.ca/. 23 A list of presidents and members is provided by the “League of Nations search engine”, http://www.lonsea.de/pub/org/903. 24 The French denomination is taken from the letterhead. Fonds Célestin Bouglé, BDIC, F delta res 852/1. 25 Fonds Célestin Bouglé, BDIC, F delta res 852/1, letter by Dotation Carnegie, Paris on 4 January 1934. 26 All quotations refer to Bouglé, Célestin; Gastinel, Pierre (1920): Qu’est-ce que l’esprit français? Vingt définitions choisies et annotées. Paris: Garnier, ch. 18, p. 56–57. Open-access version: http://classiques.uqac.ca/classiques/bougle_celestin/esprit_francais/esprit_francais.

Introduction: French Leadership

65

Regardez au fond des choses : vous y trouverez toujours le même idéalisme, et la puissance magique qui soulève à certaines heures l’élan unanime de toute la nation, c’est toujours la certitude lumineuse qu’il s’agit, à ces moments-là, de sauver la civilisation française, c’est-àdire une forme exquise de justice et de vérité universelles. (…) Notre idée de la justice, en effet, est essentiellement libérale et humaine. Elle est un composé de raison et de sentiment. Elle se fonde sur la dignité de la personne humaine, et sur l’esprit de douceur qui se mêle chez nous presque toujours aux idées pures. (…) Le droit de chacun nous apparaît moins comme une conquête égoïste de l’individu que comme une fraction du bien général et un élément de l’harmonie universelle. En défendant notre droit, nous avons le sentiment que nous défendons le droit de tous. Et c’est pour cela que toutes les nations opprimées tournent les yeux vers la France. Il faudrait ne rien connaître de l’étranger pour ignorer la puissance morale qui s’attache au nom de la France, partout où l’histoire a laissé des injustices à réparer, des souffrances à guérir. [Look at the bottom of things: you will always find the same idealism, and the magical power that at certain times raises the unanimous impetus of the entire nation is always the radiant certainty that it is, at these moments, there to save French civilization, that is, an exquisite form of universal justice and truth. (…) Our idea of justice, in fact, is essentially liberal and human. It is a compound of reason and feeling. It is based on the dignity of the human person, and on the spirit of gentleness that is almost always associated with pure ideas. (…) The right of each individual appears to us less as an egoistic conquest by the individual than as a fraction of the general good and an element of universal harmony. In defending our right, we feel that we are defending the right of all. And that is why all oppressed nations turn their eyes to France. It would be necessary to know nothing of the foreigner to ignore the moral power which attaches itself to the name of France, wherever history has left injustices to repair, sufferings to heal.]

The historical embedding that follows this statement is also worth being cited in full, as it is highly representative of the positive associations with French civilization that abounded during the interwar epoch. It requires no further explanation:27 Cette conception humaine et fraternelle de la justice est née dans la Grèce antique ; c’est la Grèce qui a créé l’idée de la dignité humaine et celle de la liberté soumise à la loi ; c’est à Athènes surtout que le sentiment de l’humanité (mot en grec) a commencé d’élargir la notion du droit, et qu’a été clairement conçue la valeur pratique et esthétique, pour l’individu comme pour la société, d’un ordre fondé sur la raison et sur l’harmonie. Rome a reçu cet héritage ; elle l’a marqué de son sceau par la netteté de ses formules et l’a transmis au monde moderne. La France, devenue chrétienne, a reçu à son tour les leçons de la sagesse antique, qu’elle a combinées avec ses tendances propres. La Révolution, enfin, suite naturelle de toute notre évolution historique, a condensé la philosophie traditionnelle de la France dans les trois mots d’une devise qui a fait le tour du monde, et, par elle, la civilisation méditerranéenne et française est devenue de plus en plus, pour une grande partie de l’humanité, la lumière et l’espérance de l’avenir ; car elle implique justice pour les individus, et justice pour les nations.

html (accessed 10 November 2016). The collaborator on the booklet is mentioned as “P. Gastinel, élève à l’École Normale Supérieure”. This was very likely Pierre Gastinel, later professor of French language and literature at the University of Lille (1936–1943). See https://data.bnf.fr/fr/13487174/pierre_gastinel/ (accessed 15 May 2019). 27 Ibid.

66

III. Human Rights Leagues and the Idea of Europe During the Interwar Period [This human and fraternal conception of justice was born in ancient Greece; it is Greece that created the idea of human dignity and that of freedom subject to the law; it is in Athens especially that the feeling of humanity (a word in Greek) has begun to broaden the notion of law, and that the practical and aesthetic value has been clearly conceived, for the individual as well as for society, of an order based on reason and harmony. Rome received this inheritance; it left its mark in the sharpness of its formulas and transmitted it to the modern world. France, having become Christian, received in her turn the lessons of ancient wisdom, which she combined with her own tendencies. The Revolution, finally, a natural continuation of all our historical evolution, has condensed the traditional philosophy of France in the three words of a motto that has gone around the world, and through it, the Mediterranean and French civilization has become more and more, for a large part of humanity, the light and the hope of the future; because it implies justice for individuals, and justice for nations.]

The human rights leagues echoed the presumed equivalence of “idéal français” and “idéal humain” quasi as a matter of course. Some examples may serve to illustrate this. Emigrants from Italy and other countries who established human rights league chapters in France (mostly Paris) did so for practical reasons, of course, as there was no real alternative. Despite its various deficiencies, the French Third Republic was the most stable democracy on the continent and granted asylum with few restrictions. Where else could political emigrants turn to with the exception of Switzerland, the UK and the Scandinavian countries, or the Americas? As Luigi Campolonghi, president of the Italian league in French exile, put it on 17 February 1934: La France – aux yeux des millions d’esclaves qui subissent les dictatures fascistes et autres – est la terre sacrée de l’hospitalité. C’est à ce titre qu’elle s’oppose, – sur le plan idéal, – au pays où la démocratie a été battue et que, en se défendant, elle peut déclarer de n’être pas seulement soucieuse de son propre intérêt, mais de protéger en même temps l’intérêt de la démocratie universelle. Politique de grande envergure et qui a besoin – pour respirer à son aise – de vastes horizons. [France – in the eyes of millions of slaves who suffer fascist and other dictatorships – is the sacred land of hospitality. It is in this respect that it opposes – on the ideal plane – the country in which democracy has been defeated and can, in defending itself, declare that it is not only concerned with its own interests, but at the same time protecting the interests of universal democracy. A policy on a grand scale that needs – in order to breathe easily – vast horizons.]28

Campolonghi also occasionally used the telling expression “la France nourricière”.29 But a cultural-historical reason existed as well: As the centre of human rights leagues, France and especially Paris expressed the current conception of European culture physically and materially. At least for the human rights leagues – all of which followed the French model – making reference to the French revolutionary “Declaration of the rights of man and citizen” was selfevident. Earlier documents were not unknown to writers and speakers, but they 28 See BDIC, F delta res 0798/59, portfolios Italian league, “Pro memoria” by Luigi Campolonghi, addressed to the secretary general of the LDH, 17 February 1934, original typescript, 11 pages, quotation p. 9: “Conclusion”. 29 Ibid., p. 10.

Introduction: French Leadership

67

generally tended to underline the specific historical significance of the French declaration.30 The Belgian league’s general assembly on 9 December 1934 featured a conference given by a lawyer on the topic of “La Déclaration des Droits de l’Homme et du Citoyen et le Pacte de la Société des Nations”. Among other things, the speaker said: Loin d’être une manifestation de pure idéologie, les déclarations des Droits de l’homme que promulga la Révolution française trouvent leurs origines véritables dans un lointain passé. Et sans doute, fallut-il pour donner aux idées qu’elles proclamaient, la forme qui assura leur rayonnement dans le monde, la fièvre née d’un grand bouleversement politique. Sans doute la proclamation des droits de l’homme et du citoyen constitue-t-elle l’expression suprême de l’intense mouvement intellectuel qui traversa tout le XVIIIe siècle français. Sans doute y trouve-t-on l’écho de la pensée des encyclopédistes et physiocrates. Mais sans diminuer leur mérite et leur gloire, il est permis d’affirmer qu’elle fut plus que l’œuvre d’une élite, le cri de libération, qu’après des siècles d’oppression, éleva toute une nation dont les citoyens entendaient désormais se garantir contre l’arbitraire. [Far from being a manifestation of pure ideology, the declarations of human rights promulgated by the French Revolution find their true origins in a distant past. And without a doubt, it was necessary to give to the ideas they proclaimed the form that assured their radiance in the world, the fever born of a great political upheaval. Without a doubt, the proclamation of the rights of man and of the citizen constitutes the supreme expression of the intense intellectual movement that spanned the entirety of the eighteenth century. Without a doubt, there is an echo of the thought of encyclopaedists and physiocrats. But without diminishing their merit and glory, it is permissible to affirm that it was more than the work of an elite, this cry of liberation that, after centuries of oppression, elevated an entire nation whose citizens henceforth intended to protect themselves against arbitrariness.]31

This quote illustrates the sense for the historical origins of human rights beyond 1789 while simultaneously explaining why the declaration of 1789 was considered unique in history. And this unique history was a French one, providing an example to the world. On 5 July 1939, the Spanish league in French exile transmitted to the LIDH its revised statutes and principles, which it had previously submitted for registration at the Paris Préfecture de Police on 1 July. The “Déclaration de principes et Statuts, 1er juillet 1939” indicates the role it attributed to the French Declaration of Human Rights: Un certain nombre d’Espagnols sont indéfectiblement attachés aux immortels principes de 1789, toujours vivants à travers d’un siècle et demi d’existence. [A certain number of Spaniards are eternally adherent to the immortal principles of 1789, still alive through a century and a half of existence.]32

30 Interestingly, this topic still remained relevant during the bicentenary (1989) of the French Revolution and the Déclaration des droits de l’homme et du citoyen. 31 BDIC, F delta res 0798/58, portfolio Belgian league, typescript, carbon copy, 8 pages. The typescript is anonymous; there is a barely decipherable handwritten name at the top of the first page, perhaps “van Leymale”. This name does not appear in other Belgian documents in the box.

68

III. Human Rights Leagues and the Idea of Europe During the Interwar Period

The paper continues:33 Peuvent donc faire partie de la Ligue, sans se considérer diminués ou liés dans leurs conceptions particulières, politiques, sociales ou religieuses les Espagnols (et, considérés comme tels, les ressortissants d’autres pays ayant combattu et exposé leur vie pour l’Espagne démocratique) qui, honnêtement, sincèrement, ont foi dans l’Idéal de Liberté comme forme permanente de gouvernement des peuples, ceux qui reconnaissent les Droits de l’Homme et du Citoyen, tels qu’ils furent énoncés par la Révolution française et développés par les conquêtes populaires successives, comme le patrimoine sacré et inaliénable hérité de nos pères, avec l’obligation de l’augmenter et, en tout cas, de ne jamais en accepter la diminution. [Therefore, those Spaniards (and, as such, nationals of other countries who have fought and exposed their lives for democratic Spain) may be part of the League without considering themselves to be diminished or bound in their particular political, social or religious conceptions who, honestly, sincerely, have faith in the Ideal of Liberty as a permanent form of government of peoples, those who recognize the Rights of Man and the Citizen as they were set forth by the French Revolution and developed by the successive popular achievements, such as the sacred and inalienable heritage inherited from our fathers, with the obligation to increase it and, in any case, never to accept its diminution.]

The Spanish league did not fail to add a reference to Spanish roots of human rights by quoting Don Quichote:34 Ces principes ont pour eux de profondes racines hispaniques dans les vieux codes (“Justiciagos” [sic!]) d’Aragon et dans ce monument universel de la littérature espagnole qu’est “Le Quichotte” : “(…) la Liberté, ami Sancho, est l’un des biens les plus précieux que les hommes tiennent des cieux. Tous les trésors que la terre renferme ou que les mers recèlent ne parviennent point à l’égaler. Pour la liberté, comme pour l’honneur, on peut et l’on doit risquer de perdre la vie (…)” (“Don Quichotte de la Manche”, Ch. LVIII, II partie). [These principles have deep Hispanic roots in the old codes (“Justiciagos” [sic!]) of Aragon and in this universal monument of Spanish literature that is “The Quixote”: “(…) Liberty, friend Sancho, is one of the most precious possessions that men have from heaven: all the treasures that the earth contains or that the sea conceals cannot match it. For freedom, as for honour, one can and one must risk losing one’s life (…)” (“Don Quixote de la Mancha”, Ch. LVIII, part II).]

The same quotation was also used in Spanish for the letterhead of the Spanish league in exile. It may not come as a surprise that human rights league activists looked at history through these “French-tinted” glasses. Nevertheless, it did not prevent further thoughts and discussions on how to modernize the concept of human rights. The French LDH established a commission in 1935 to study the question of how the declarations of 1789 and 1793 could be amended.35 René Cassin, who 32 BDIC, F delta res 0798/58, portfolio Spanish league, letter by Liga Española de los Derechos del Hombre, Sección de Paris, 5 July 1939, to the secretary general of the FIDH, enclosure “Déclaration de principes et Statuts, 1er juillet 1939”, typescript, original and carbon copy, signed by president Cabrera and secretary general Nolla, p. 1. 33 Ibid., p. 2. 34 Ibid., p. 1. 35 Manceron, The French Ligue des droits de l’homme’s Interest in International Issues, op. cit., p. 60, refers to the “Congrès national de la Ligue des droits de l’homme 1935, Paris 1936”.

Citizens for Human Rights and “Europe vécue”

69

later worked on the UN Declaration of Human Rights, was one of its members. The Swiss league argued for an extension and asked the LIDH to include the issue in the agenda of the LIDH congress in 1936.36 In 1937, Victor Basch reported that president Rudolf Goldscheid of the Austrian league likewise supported an extension of the Declaration of Human Rights to encompass women’s rights, trade unions’ rights and the like.37 Other leagues simply asked for printed brochures with the Declaration to distribute.38 Effectively, the intent of the human rights leagues to discuss the adaption of the human rights declaration came too late. The Grand Orient de France had already debated the subject during its 1924 convention – with the Freemasons pleading economic reasons, arguing that the global economic system had been shaken. Specifically, they stipulated the right of individuals to work, the right to equal education for all people depending only on their personal capacities or incapacities, the freedom to form associations, and the right of every citizen to social welfare.39 The quest for an expansion of the definition of human rights did not call into question the “French character” of true civilization. The defeat of the Germans in 1918 had simultaneously signified the defeat of a specific German civilization that was directed against the “principles of 1789”. The German historian Ernst Troeltsch can be taken as an exponent of this parallel “cultural war”. 40 The reference to the 1789 Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen therefore reveals a further symbolic meaning. Another element contributing to French predominance was France’s rich landscape of associations forming a genuine civil society. CITIZENS FOR HUMAN RIGHTS AND “EUROPE VÉCUE” Who, then, were the people who established human rights leagues, met at international congresses like the one in Brussels in 1926 and pleaded for a United States of Europe? In general terms, one must say that they belonged to a minority within Europe – and they remained one even when taking into account the entire network 36 BDIC, F delta res 0798/60, portfolio Swiss league, letter from the Swiss secretary to the FIDH, 12 March 1936. 37 BDIC, F delta res 0798/54, portfolios German league, minutes of the meeting of the FIDH Comité international, 20 January 1937: Victor Basch reports that Rudolf Goldscheid from the Austrian league had proposed to him to extend the Declaration. 38 See BDIC, F delta res 0798/56, undated handwritten notice concerning such a request made by the Luxemburgish and Spanish leagues. 39 See L’Acacia. Revue mensuelle d’études et d’action maçonniques et sociales, N o 18, April 1925, section “Sous le Triangle”, p. 3, “Question D”: “Rédaction d’un complément à la déclaration des droits de l’homme & du citoyen”. 40 Große Kracht, Klaus (2002): “Ein Europa im Kleinen”. Die Sommergespräche von Pontigny und die deutsch-französische Intellektuellenverständigung in der Zwischenkriegszeit. In: Internationales Archiv für Sozialgeschichte der deutschen Literatur, vol. 27, No 1, p. 144–169.

70

III. Human Rights Leagues and the Idea of Europe During the Interwar Period

that existed between human rights activists, pacifists, League of Nations societies, internationalists, convinced and idealistic democrats, and centre-left and left-wing parties. It was a strong minority in Great Britain and France, but a relatively small and weak one in other countries such as Germany, Austria and Spain. But it could be found everywhere – in Italy, the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxemburg, Scandinavia, and even in Eastern and Southeastern Europe. Although national peculiarities were difficult to compensate for, it was still a European minority – and for quite some time, this circumstance was its strategic advantage. First and foremost, the people we are talking about were women and men who supported democracy, human rights and pacifist ideas. They promoted civil rights, women’s rights, children’s rights, the rights of conscientious objectors, the rights of homosexuals, the rights of foreigners, the rights of indigenous people in the colonies and the rights of minorities. They struggled for the right to medical assistance and the right to decent pensions. They campaigned for the rights of trade unions and defended the freedom of opinion for the media as well as for the individual. They intervened in tens of thousands of individual cases, fearlessly criticizing administrations, governments and other institutions publicly. They submitted petitions, compiled reports on human rights violations in various countries all over the world and investigated the atrocities committed by fascism, National Socialism, the Falange Española and other authoritarian and dictatorial regimes. Together, they amassed a stupendous amount of documentation on the cruelties committed by governments in interwar Europe – and they also informed the public about these acts of “barbarism”, as they called them. They organized campaigns and co-operated not only with human rights leagues, but also with innumerable other associations and organizations operating in a national or international framework and sharing the same values. They supported the League of Nations and contributed to some of its committees. They hosted conferences and congresses at home and abroad; in fact, as long as travelling was possible, they exhibited an admirable mobility. Naturally, they not only criticized regimes but attempted to convince the few democratic governments in the interwar period to intervene in favour of human rights and put an end to dictatorships. Last but not least, they promoted the idea of a United States of Europe with great conviction. In short, they were citizens in the full historical sense of the word. This is to say that they did not distinguish between civil, civic and political activities.41 Many were academics or university professors, like Elise Richter of the Austrian league or Alexandros Svolos, first president of the Greek league.42 Some were well-known or even famous intellectuals like Miguel Unamuno, Salvador de Madariaga or Carl von Ossietzky (Nobel Prize for Peace 1935). Ferdinand Buisson, one of the presidents of the LDH, also received the Nobel Prize for 41 The names cited in the text above serve only as examples. For more details, see the contributions in Schmale/Treiblmayr, eds., Human Rights Leagues, op. cit. 42 University professors were particularly involved in the Greek league. See Moraitidis, Michalis (2017): The History and the Interventions of the Hellenic League for Human Rights (1918–2016). In: Schmale/Treiblmayr, eds., Human Rights Leagues, op. cit., p. 139–156.

Citizens for Human Rights and “Europe vécue”

71

Peace in 1927 together with Ludwig Quidde, a member of the Bund Neues Vaterland, the forerunner society of the German League for Human Rights. Albert Einstein, who received the Nobel Prize for Physics in 1921, was a founding member of the Bund as well. Others were journalists like Otto Lehmann-Rußbüldt (Bund), G. Makris (Greek league), Aurelio Natoli (Italian league) or Luigi Campolonghi (president of the Italian league). Some held a political office as minister, member of parliament or member of senate, like Stanisław Thugutt and Stanisław Patek (Polish league, both served as ministers among other functions). Some were Freemasons, like Constantin G. Costa-Foru (founder of the Romanian league), and some had a Jewish background43 like Elise Richter. Most were affiliated with left-wing parties, some were communists. Most belonged not just to one association but to several, preferably to a pacifist association and/or to a society established in support of the League of Nations, like the International Commission on Intellectual Co-operation. In many cases, they were cosmopolitan Europeans. Academics maintained relations with their colleagues in European and non-European countries, travelled to attend conferences or give lectures, and sent and received hundreds or even thousands of letters. Célestin Bouglé, quoted above, may serve as a representative example. Freemasons were not Europeanists by definition, but in reality they often were – and the same was true for many people with a Jewish background. Others were Europeanists for idealistic reasons. The political family of socialists was inclined toward any form of trans- and international thinking. The ligueurs understood themselves as an élite (intellectuelle) – which obviously does not gel with our understanding of civil society today. They were careful to explain what they meant, however, as did many other thinkers in the interwar period. Some of the opinions expressed in the “Cahiers” and elsewhere may have been commensurate to Antonio Gramsci’s thoughts on the intellectual and his role in society, but there were many other books like Vilfredo Pareto’s “Trattato di sociologia generale” (1916) (English title: Mind and Society) that discussed at length the question of elites and had an impact within Europe (though probably less among the ligueurs).44 In 1924, Albert Bayet, the Directeur d’Etudes à l’École des Hautes-Etudes, argued in the “Cahiers” that people who were considered to be part of an elite were people who had esprit and made a decision in favour of an idea such as human rights, staying with this idea for their entire lives.45 The footer on the cover 43 One must be cautious with the attribution of a Jewish identity. People often did not see themselves as “Jews”; the attribution came later when people were stigmatized as “Jews” and persecuted. Irvine, Between Justice and Politics, op. cit., deals with this question, passim. 44 The impact of the debate on the intellectual elites and elites in general during the interwar period is discussed by Gusejnova, Dina (2016): European Elites and Ideas of Empire, 1917– 1957. Cambridge. See also Charle, Christophe (2001): La crise des sociétés impériales. Allemagne, France, Grande-Bretagne (1900–1940). Essai d’histoire sociale comparé. Paris. 45 Bayet, Albert (1924): Pour une élite intellectuelle. In: Les Cahiers des Droits de l’Homme, No 16, 25 August, p. 382–385.

72

III. Human Rights Leagues and the Idea of Europe During the Interwar Period

page of each issue of the “Cahiers” read: “Revue d’idées pour le combat. Revue de combat par les idées” [Review of ideas for the fight. Review of the fight for ideas]. This addressed not just a small elite, but all those who had chosen the idea of human rights as the leading notion in the struggle for peace, democracy and humanitarianism. This broad interpretation of the concept of élite did not exclude “normal” people. While the executive committees of the exile human rights leagues were composed of personalities who were among the leading public figures of their country or national community in French, British or Scandinavian exile, the majority of members were not part of this distinguished minority.46 In 1921, Félicien Challaye (1875–1967), Agrégé de l’Université, member of the LDH and its Commission d’études coloniales, member of the Comité d’Amnistie et de Défense des Indochinois (whose honorary president was Romain Rolland, Nobel Prize laureate for literature in 1915),47 author of the LDH publication “L’énigme de la Chine actuelle”48 (and of many other writings) and later supporter of the Vichy regime49, published a report in the “Cahiers” on the Pan-African Congress held in Paris on 4–5 September 1921. He stated that the congress “a révélé aux uns, fait mieux apprécier aux autres, l’existence d’une élite noire ou mulâtre, dont l’influence se fera de plus en plus sentir sur le progrès de l’Humanité” [has revealed to some, to the appreciation of others, the existence of a black or mulatto elite whose influence on the progress of humanity will be felt more and more].50 Challaye was known for his anti-colonialism,51 so it was not surprising that he extended the notion of élite to non-Europeans. Another member of the Commission d’études coloniales (often abbreviated to Commission coloniale), Monsieur F. E. Babut, argued similarly in a meeting of the commission in July 1928 regarding the problem of naturalization of indigenous people in the French colonies:

46 Claveau, L’Autre dans les Cahiers, op. cit., presents a statistic referring to what she calls “État major de la LDH” (p. 115). It includes members of the Comité central, presidents of the regional and local chapters, etc. The total number is 2,691 persons for two decades (1920– 1940). For 1,597 of these persons, the author was able to identify their professional background. Nearly 60% of them belonged to “professions libérales”, “employés et cadres” (p. 119). This is probably representative for the leading circle of the LDH, but the numbers should not be generalized in regard to all members of the LDH between 1920 and 1940. Irvine, Between Justice and Politics, op. cit., ch. 1, produces some numbers for regional and local chapters; more than 60% may have belonged to the groups of workers, artisans, small businessmen, farmers and the like. 47 BDIC, F delta res 0798/65, portfolio colonies. 48 Challaye, Félicien (1927): L’énigme de la Chine actuelle. Paris: Ligue des droits de l’homme, 55 pages. See BDIC, F delta res 798/45, Liste des ouvrages et brochures offerts en don à la Bibliothèque nationale par la Ligue des Droits de l’Homme (1934). 49 See Irvine, Between Justice and Politics, op. cit., ch. 8 (“Vichy”). 50 Les Cahiers des Droits de l’Homme, 1921, No 18, 25 September, report Challaye, p. 420–424. 51 Challaye was studied by Emmanuel Naquet; he frequently refers to him in Naquet, Pour l’humanité, op. cit.

Citizens for Human Rights and “Europe vécue”

73

(…) ces naturalisations individuelles aboutissent en réalité à priver ces peuples de leur élite et partant, de ceux-là mêmes qui pourraient leur servir de guides dans leurs efforts vers leur émancipation tant politique que sociale. [(…) these individual naturalizations actually result in depriving these peoples of their elite and thus of those who could serve as guides in their efforts towards their emancipation, both political and social.]52

The first congress of the LIDH was to be held in Paris on 28 May 1922. Señor Barcia, vice-president of the Spanish league and its delegate to the international congress, stated: La Ligue des Droits de l’Homme, en Espagne, est de cœur avec sa sœur aînée de France. Elle ne groupe qu’une minorité, mais cette minorité représente l’élite intellectuelle de la nation. [The League of Human Rights in Spain is of one heart with its elder sister in France. It only unites a minority, but this minority represents the intellectual elite of the nation.] 53

Here the term élite may simply be an appraisal of the factual situation, but it may also express an elitist understanding of the notion of élite. In 1928, Victor Basch54 – presumably the most famous member of the LDH and its president from 1926 – briefly described the common circumstance that was characteristic for many leagues and associations when he referred, by way of example, to Count Coudenhove-Kalergi’s “Pan-Europa” as follows: (…) ce sont des hommes trop peu nombreux et n’appartenant qu’à l’élite intellectuelle et sociale, qui se sont groupés autour de ce que le comte Canergi-Kudenhoven [sic!] a appelé le Pan-Europa. [(…) they are too few men belonging only to the intellectual and social elite who have gathered around what Count Canergi-Kudenhoven [sic!] has called Pan-Europa.]55

In Basch’s view, the next step would have to be to convince the peoples of Europe. This does not necessarily contradict an open sociological meaning of élite, since the social space existing between the intellectual and social elite on the one side and the entire population of a country on the other side is large. Luigi Campolonghi, president of the Italian league and thus backed by more than 3,000 members, submitted a “Pro memoria” dated 17 February 1934 to the LDH. In it, he discussed the situation of Italian emigrants to France, emphasizing that they were not to be considered supplicators, but instead formed an elite: (…) il ne faut pas oublier que les hommes libres dont nous défendons la cause, ne s’adressent pas seulement à la France nourricière, ils s’adressent aussi et surtout à la République libre. Ils ne sont pas les clients de la France : ils sont ses amis fidèles et dévoués. Ce sont ceux qui, en ces jours sombres, sauvegardent l’avenir de la fraternité franco-italienne, qui, un jour, sera une réalité. Ils sont l’élite, le noyau de l’Italie de demain.

52 BDIC, F delta res 798/9, convocation for a meeting of the Commission coloniale, dated 9 July 1928; the meeting was to be held on 12 July 1928. 53 Les Cahiers des Droits de l’Homme, 1922, No 13, 25 June, p. 303. 54 On Basch, see Naquet, Pour l’humanité, op. cit., passim. 55 Les Cahiers des Droits de l’Homme, 1928, No 32, 20 December, p. 762.

74

III. Human Rights Leagues and the Idea of Europe During the Interwar Period [(…) we must not forget that the free men whose cause we are defending are not only addressing the nourishing France, they are also addressing the free Republic. They are not the customers of France: they are its faithful and devoted friends. They are those who, in these dark days, safeguard the future of Franco-Italian fraternity, which one day will be a reality. They are the elite, the nucleus of Italy of tomorrow.] 56

Once again, the use of élite does not seem to have an exclusive meaning. A further example from Albania is also pertinent to this brief investigation into the human rights leagues’ notions of élite. A document signed by “Un groupe d’Albanais”, dated 20 October 1939 and addressed to Émile Kahn, described the situation in contemporary Albania, outlining the recent history of the country since it had gained national sovereignty in 1913: Aussitôt que la stabilité politique à l’intérieur fut acquise, les dirigeants du peuple albanais se rendirent compte que pour doter le pays d’une structure moderne il fallait avant tout le pourvoir d’une élite intellectuelle formée aux disciplines de la culture occidentale. L’Etat, l’industrie, l’agriculture, en un mot tous les domaines de l’économie nationale et de la vie publique avaient besoin, pour être bien dirigés, de techniciens et de spécialistes sortis de quelque université des grands pays civilisés. [As soon as internal political stability was achieved, the leaders of the Albanian people realized that in order to endow the country with a modern structure, it was necessary above all to provide it with an intellectual elite trained in the disciplines of Western culture. The state, industry, agriculture, in a word all fields of the national economy and public life, in order to be well-directed, needed technicians and specialists from some university of the great civilized countries.]57

Although élite is ostensibly linked to university education in this document, it effectively encompasses a large range of professions not necessarily covered by the notion of élite intellectuelle, such as engineers in various occupational fields. The Albanian wording seems to mirror an opinion likewise expressed by Gheorghe Țițeica, a leading figure in Romanian academia), chairman of the Romanian Committee on Intellectual Co-operation, in a report on “Intellectual Co-operation between the Balkan States” presented to the “League of Nations, International Institute of Intellectual Co-operation. Second General Conference of the National Committees for Intellectual Co-operation” in July 1937: Practically all the Balkan peoples have passed through the same historical vicissitudes that have retarded the development of their intellectual institutions. To make good the time that had thus been lost, independently of the neighbouring nations, was a question of capital importance for each of these people. To this end, the élite of the younger generation has been sent abroad, to countries of highly developed culture and according to certain national affinities.58

56 See BDIC, F delta res 0798/59, Luigi Campolonghi, Pro memoria, 17 February 1934, addressed to the secretary general of the LDH, 11 pages, typescript (original), quotation p. 10. 57 See BDIC, F delta res 0798/58, portfolio Albanian league, letter addressed to Émile Kahn, dated 20 October 1939, 17 pages, typescript, p. 1 and 17 original, p. 2–16 carbon copy. The letter is anonymous and signed by “un groupe d’Albanais”. 58 See BDIC, Fonds Société des Nations, Coopération intellectuelle, 4 delta 1056, printed typescript, 8 pages, document No A.15.1937 (Doc. Exp. 14), p. 1. The inventory of the BDIC does

Citizens for Human Rights and “Europe vécue”

75

As a last voice, we may listen to Gonzague de Reynold (1880–1970), a conservative and convinced Christian with an authoritarian political orientation and author of a seven-volume history of Europe ending with the Middle Ages. 59 Despite his propensity for authoritarianism, he served as chairman of the Swiss Committee on Intellectual Co-operation and, from 1932, as vice-president of the Commission for Intellectual Co-operation at the League of Nations. Reynold gave a speech to the same General Conference as Țițeica, focusing on the adjective “intellectual” – which, as we have seen, was often used to specify the substantive “elite”, saying the following among other things: When we talk of intellectual co-operation, this common good is spiritual values, civilization in general, indeed peace itself. This common good requires from all those who make themselves its defenders and promoters a kind of vocation that simple collaboration does not require. (…) What I propose for intellectual co-operation is a new kind of humanism. (…) Our task is to know and understand peoples in their different aspects. (…) The end and the work of intellectual co-operation in the contemporary world is to create a synthesis between nationalism and internationalism. (…) Nationalism is the consciousness that nations have acquired of their own genius, once they have been personified. (…) We are here to prepare, and perhaps to achieve in certain minds, a new universality. Universality in the sense that Bossuet gives to it: “To understand by the mind what is great in men.”60

Naturally, the debate on what was “intellectual” in “intellectual co-operation” at the League of Nations had an impact on the general interwar discourse on the terms “intellectual” and “elite”, and one must presume that the statements on the

not tell the story of its “Fonds Société des Nations”. However, as the documents are about prints by the League of Nations that bear an official LoN classification, they can be found in the original archive of the International Committee on Intellectual Cooperation, which is now kept by UNESCO in Paris: https://atom.archives.unesco.org/international-institute-ofintellectual-co-operation. 59 Reynold, Gonzague de (1941–1957): La Formation de l’Europe, 7 vols. Paris. See also Mattioli, Aram (1994): Zwischen Demokratie und totalitärer Diktatur. Gonzague de Reynold und die Tradition der autoritären Rechten in der Schweiz. Zurich. 60 League of Nations, International Institute of Intellectual Co-operation. Second General Conference of the National Committees of Intellectual Co-operation. July, 1937. Role of the Intellectual Co-operation Section of the League of Nations in the Organization of the Present-Day World, by M. G. de Reynold, Chairman of the Swiss Committee on Intellectual Co-operation, typescript duplicate, 18 pages, document number A.19.1937 (Doc. Exp. 24). See BDIC, Fonds Société des Nations, Coopération intellectuelle, 4 delta 1056. See also Renoliet, JeanJacques (1999): L’UNESCO oubliée. La société des nations et la coopération intellectuelle (1919–1946). Paris (Publications de la Sorbonne, Série internationale, 59). Renoliet, JeanJacques (2007): La France et l’Organisation de Coopération Intellectuelle de la SDN. Entre unilatéralisme et multilatéralisme, 1919–1932. In: Bariéty, Jacques, ed.: Aristide Briand, la Société des Nations et l’Europe 1919–1932. Strasbourg, p. 237–250. See also Ducci, Annamaria (2012): Europe and the Artistic Patrimony of the Interwar Period. The International Institute of Intellectual Cooperation at the League of Nations League of Nations. In: Hewitson/D’Auria, eds., Europe in Crisis, op. cit., p. 227–242.

76

III. Human Rights Leagues and the Idea of Europe During the Interwar Period

matter made by members of various human rights leagues were not unaffected by it as well.61 *** There is a lack of sociological studies on membership in human rights leagues during the interwar period.62 Such studies would help to answer the question to what extent it was elitist or not. Some aspects and details are known, however: In the 1930s, the French league reached the mark of 180,000 members, thereby surely transcending any narrow definition of “elite” even though many members arguably limited their activity to the payment of their membership fees. The German league counted 725 individual members and a further 16,700 through other associations that had joined collectively (German pacifists and German monists).63 How elitist is this number? The Romanian league included around 1,000 members in 1926,64 while the Italian league (in exile) had 3,065 members in 1931 and maintained chapters in France, Switzerland and Tunisia as well as several more with mostly symbolic meaning (e.g. Australia).65 Eric Vial supposes that these numbers, which include only members paying the membership fees, are no more than “the tip of the iceberg”. Other leagues had several hundred members or less, though exact numbers can rarely be established. In summary, we must presume that the French, Italian and German human rights leagues were built on a large and sociologically diverse foundation while others, for various reasons, relied on an intellectual and cultural minority. In comparison to other associations or organizations, the human rights leagues were of medium size. Coudenhove-Kalergi’s Paneuropean Union had no more than around 6,000 members in all countries combined. Other associations like the Office Franco-Allemand had less than 100 members.66 Some of the societies supporting the League of Nations achieved very high membership numbers as quoted above for Britain, and peace associations attracted many members as well. The leagues opposed injustices committed against ordinary people – victims “sans notoriété ni influence” as Alphonse Aulard, a famous historian of the

61 As an exemplary study on the notion and practice of “elites”, see Knipping, Franz; Dupeux, Louis; Hudemann, Rainer, eds. (1994–1996): Eliten in Deutschland und Frankreich im 19. und 20. Jahrhundert. Strukturen und Beziehungen / Elites en France et en Allemagne aux XIXème et XXème siècles. Structures et relations, 2 vols. Munich. See also Karady, Victor, ed. (2008): Elite Formation in the Other Europe (19 th–20th Century) = Historical Social Research (HSR), vol. 33, No 2. 62 Irvine, Between Justice and Politics, op. cit., provides some insights in ch. 1. 63 Les Cahiers des Droits de l’Homme, 1924, p. 210. 64 According to Constantin Costa-Foru, secretary general of the Romanian League, in his report to the international congress in Brussels in 1926: Les Cahiers des Droits de l’Homme, 1926, p. 413. 65 See Vial, The Lega italiana dei diritti dell’uomo, op. cit., p. 177. 66 Burgard, Das gemeinsame Europa, op. cit., p. 100.

Citizens for Human Rights and “Europe vécue”

77

French Revolution and member of the LDH, put it once.67 In 1937, the so-called Basel League for Human Rights68 launched an intensive public campaign to prevent the execution of workers condemned to death by the Nazi Volksgerichtshof 69 in Stuttgart. These workers, among them a young woman and mother of a child, Lilo (Liselotte) Hermann, had insisted on the freedom of opinion and all the liberties conveyed to free persons by the human rights. They had taken the idea of liberty and human rights as a guideline for their actions. The same social class was to be found among German emigrants to France and other countries. In 1936, the Comité National Tchéco-Slovaque pour les Réfugiés provenant d’Allemagne performed an enquiry among organizations assisting German refugees. The resulting memorandum, which was addressed to the High Commissioner of the League of Nations for German Refugees and to a conference to be held in Geneva on 2 July 1936, included a statistic claiming slightly fewer than one thousand German refugees (referring to April 1936; two thirds were men, one fifth women, the rest children). The majority were craftsmen or artisans and merchants, with intellectuals making up less than 10%. The human rights leagues assisted them with legal advice as well as supporting them in finding jobs. The Czechoslovakian league had even established a special committee to aid refugees: the Demokratische Flüchtlingsfürsorge.70 Its secretary, however, was Kurt Grossmann of the German League.71 In all, the definition of élite seems to have been that of an intellectual idealism, but it was not exclusive in terms of particular social classes. A worker could have intellectual idealism as well. This is relevant in regard to the theoretical definition as well as to practical activities. It is worth noting that human rights leagues not only advocated for full civic and political rights for women, but that women also played leading roles in many of the leagues. I have already mentioned Elise Richter, Aline Ménard-Dorian and Milly Zirker, and one could add the suffragette Teodora Męczkowska (co-founder of the Polish league) and the writers Władysława Weychert-Szymanowska (Polish league), Rosa Mayreder (Austrian league) and Ernesta Cassola-Campolonghi (Italian league), among others.

67 International congress, Brussels, 1926. In: Les Cahiers des Droits de l’Homme, 1926, p. 415. On Aulard, see Naquet, Pour l’humanité, op. cit., passim. 68 See BDIC, F delta res 0798/56. This league called itself “Liga für Menschenrechte Basel”. Based on the archival material of the BDIC, it is impossible to determine whether it was a chapter of the Swiss league in Basel or not. Most probably, it was the Basel chapter of the Swiss league. 69 Lists with the names of people who were condemned to death by the Nazi Volksgerichtshöfe are now online and freely accessible: https://www.landesarchiv-bw.de/web/58486. See also https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste_von_im_Deutschen_Reich_hingerichteten_Personen. 70 BDIC, F delta res 798/64, portfolio Czechoslovakia. 71 I am grateful to Christopher Treiblmayr for this information; see also Mertens, Lothar (1997): Unermüdlicher Kämpfer für Frieden und Menschenrechte. Leben und Wirken von Kurt R. Grossmann. Berlin (Beiträge zur Politischen Wissenschaft, 97), p. 100 et seq.

78

III. Human Rights Leagues and the Idea of Europe During the Interwar Period

Human rights leagues activists testify to what the historian Hartmut Kaelble and other scholars have called “Europe vécue” – “lived Europe”.72 One aspect of this “lived Europe” is the forging of a network among the leagues and with other associations, another is the mobility of ligueurs outside their respective countries, and a third – and probably the most significant aspect – is the sharing of values. The fight for human rights and democracy was a global one, and we can track the traces of this worldwide effort in the documents left behind by the human rights leagues. But European countries formed the main focus: The Europe of violations of human rights, of threats to or oppression of democracy, and the Europe in which democracy survived or was less intensely threatened encompassed “geographic Europe” from the Urals to Atlantic Iceland, from the North Cape to Sicily. It included Georgia and Armenia, but not Turkey. This expansive concept of Europe under the ideological premise of human rights and democracy was “physically” present in Paris and represented by the human rights leagues in French – or more precisely in Parisian – exile. In alphabetical order, human rights leagues from the following countries and cities existed in Paris during the interwar period (at least at some point in time) or were represented by a delegate to the LIDH while engaging in activities in their places of origin.73 Some of them also established chapters in French provinces, like the Italian league: Albania (active in Tirana), Argentina (active in Argentina), Armenia (active in French exile), Austria (active in Austria), Belgium (active in Belgium), Bulgaria (active in Sofia), China74, Czechoslovakia (active in Czechoslovakia), Danzig, Egypt (active in French exile), France, Georgia (active in French exile), Germany (active in Germany, then Prague, then France; a German chapter also appears in Barcelona in 193775), Greece (active in Greece), Haiti 72 Norwig, Erste europäische Generation, op. cit., describes these models for interpretation, p. 12–18. 73 See BDIC, F delta res 0798/58. This box holds a portfolio concerning the Albanian league. It contains notes on various human rights leagues represented by delegates to the LIDH. The notes include some names and offices (president, secretary general, delegate, etc.) as well as addresses and the year of validity of the information. Some of the portfolios in box BDIC, F delta res 0798/58 and other boxes, BDIC, F delta res 0798/54-60 include contemporary inventory lists of documents that were, as it seems, held by the LIDH. Most of these documents are apparently not preserved. It is not possible, at least at the current time, to establish whether they were destroyed before the Gestapo confiscated them or whether they were destroyed, lost or incorporated into other archive funds by the Gestapo or, subsequently, by the Red Army and the Soviet Union, which confiscated the archives in 1945 and transported them to Moscow. The holdings have since been repatriated to France and, in the case of the archive of the Austrian league, to Vienna – but only partially. For a synthesis, see the table in Schmale, Wolfgang; Treiblmayr, Christopher (2017): The History of Human Rights Leagues. An Introduction. In: Schmale/Treiblmayr, eds., Human Rights Leagues, op. cit., p. 24–31. 74 It is unclear whether it was an exile organization or not. China was member of the League of Nations, and Chinese delegates attended an international conference of associations in support of the League of Nations held in Paris on 26–31 January 1919. On this conference, see Guieu, La SDN et ses organisations, op. cit., p. 13. Second international conference in London, 11–13 March 1919, with attendance by a Chinese delegate; ibid., p. 13. 75 BDIC, F delta res 798/55.

Citizens for Human Rights and “Europe vécue”

79

(active in Port-au-Prince, Haiti), Hungary (active in French exile), Italy (active in French exile), Luxemburg (active in Luxemburg), Poland (active in Poland and Paris), Portugal (active in Portugal, then in Paris), Romania (active in Romania and Paris), Russia (active in French exile), Spain (active in Spain, then in French exile during the time of the Franco regime), Switzerland (active in Switzerland) and Yugoslavia (active in French exile). The history of these leagues and their activities along with the history of their archives is a topic of its own that is currently being investigated within a separate ongoing research project.76 The focus in this subchapter is on the “physical” representation of a certain Europe by way of the human rights leagues. Some remarks concerning the above list should be added: There were efforts to establish a Dutch as well as an English and a Swedish league, but all three initiatives failed. Several organizations engaged with human rights issues existed in Britain, but none of them joined the LIDH: In several documents77, reference is made to the National Council for Civil Liberties and the Union of Democratic Control. There are also letters sent by a League for the Rights of Man from Palestine (Haifa, Tel Aviv and Jerusalem) that was affiliated with the British National Council for Civil Liberties.78 Norway was not represented by a human rights league at the LIDH, either: A portfolio in the archives of the BDIC entitled “Ligue Norvégienne” is misleading.79 Ties to the Scandinavian countries as well as to the United States of America did exist, however. Paris, and to some extent metropolitan France, represented the centre of the human rights league movement in Europe. This can be explained in part by history and in part by practical reasons. Historically, the French Ligue des Droits de l’Homme was the first league to be founded.80 It came into being as a result of the repudiation of the unjust denunciation and trial of the Jewish French army captain Alfred Dreyfus by many intellectuals in the French Third Republic. The official year of its foundation was 1898. Dreyfus’s eventual rehabilitation was a success owed largely, though not exclusively, to the LDH. This example subsequently inspired people in other countries to establish human rights leagues as well: Belgium (1901), Spain (1913), Germany (1914), Greece (1918), Poland, Portugal and Italy (in French exile, 1921), Bulgaria (1922), Luxemburg and Romania 76 See Schmale/Treiblmayr, eds., Human Rights Leagues, op. cit. Christopher Treiblmayr is in the process of preparing a book on the international history of the Austrian league in 1926– 1938/1945–1951. 77 See BDIC, F delta res 0798/54, portfolios German league. 78 See BDIC, F delta res 0798/54, portfolios German league, letter by Dr. E. Hinden in (bad) English to Jules Prudhommeaux (LIDH), 3 March 1938. The question of membership in the LIDH is raised. 79 See BDIC, F delta res 0798/54, portfolio Norwegian league; it contains only one letter from Norway concerning Trotsky, but there is no reference to a Norwegian league. 80 See Naquet, Pour l’humanité, op. cit., with an abundant bibliography. A conference dealing with the LDH’s postwar history was held at the BDIC in December 2018: http://www. lacontemporaine.fr/journees-d-etudes/colloque-la-ligue-des-droits-de-l-homme-depuis-la2nde-guerre-mondiale (accessed 23 February 2019).

80

III. Human Rights Leagues and the Idea of Europe During the Interwar Period

(1923), Austria and Czechoslovakia (1926), Switzerland (1928) and others followed the French model. Led by the French league, the LIDH was established in 1922; its registered office was and remained the same as that of the LDH. The French league established chapters not only in French colonies and protectorates (see below), but also in various European countries: LDH chapters were active in Koblenz, Ludwigshafen, Mainz, Trier and Wiesbaden in Germany, in Leuze in Belgium, in Vintimille in Italy (effectively, this chapter was established in Menton, France) and in Geneva in Switzerland.81 Many of the leagues’ members became victims of the respective terror regimes themselves and were forced to emigrate. Human rights leagues often took care of their members, but national administrations were often more reserved towards foreigners applying for the status of a political refugee and émigré. Supporting these emigrants (Italians, Spaniards, Germans, Hungarians, Armenians, Georgians etc.) in completing the inevitable administrative procedures became one of the primary endeavours of the French league. But in 1940, after the defeat of France and the establishment of the “Etat français” under Maréchal Pétain, personalities like Milly Zirker, secretary general of the LIDH, were likewise detained in prison camps. Zirker, who was imprisoned in Gurs-camp in the Pyrenees, succeeded in escaping and emigrating to the USA. This was the Europe vécue of the human rights activists. By the late 1930s, “lived Europe” was becoming more and more restricted to France. Physically, it disappeared for a brief period of time with the outbreak of the Second World War, but it re-emerged very soon in the shape of resistance movements. “LES CAHIERS DES DROITS DE L’HOMME” (1920–1940) AN INTERNATIONAL PLATFORM FOR A UNITED STATES OF EUROPE Studies on the idea of Europe and political projects for European cooperation or union during the interwar period rarely take into account the “Cahiers des Droits de l’Homme” as a useful primary source. Effectively, the “Cahiers” are valuable not only due to their many articles dealing with European issues, but also because they reached more readers in Europe and beyond than other periodicals. The “Cahiers” were the official organ of the French LDH, and in the absence of a separate periodical of its own, they also functioned as the official publication of the LIDH. Each issue of the “Cahiers” featured as its final section the “Bulletin des Droits de l’Homme”, which informed the members of the LDH and other readers about goings-on and activities in the regional federations and local chapters of the French league. Some of the regional federations and local chapters also published bulletins or periodical information sheets of their own. The “Bulletin” by itself served as the official periodical of the LDH until 1920. The various 81 Les Cahiers des Droits de l’Homme, 1914, p. 462.

“Les Cahiers des Droits de l’Homme” (1920–1940)

81

human rights leagues actively exchanged their publications among each other, but the “Cahiers” had subscribers all over the world. The editorial tasks were performed by the Commission des Cahiers, which brought together leading ligueurs from the Comité Central as well as from the LDH in general. The “Cahiers” were published in French. In contrast to the present day, French was a language commonly spoken by the European and global intellectual elite at the time. In fact, French and English were the two languages that were used, often ex officio, around the world and in particular by the League of Nations. French was therefore suitable for circulating factual information, “content”, ideas and the like, and its use did not restrict the potential readership to a minority like it would today. On the contrary, although German was read and spoken not only in the German-speaking countries but also in Central and Eastern Europe, the range of influence of French was greater. This is to say that it is not only the number of published copies that matters for a periodical like the “Cahiers”, but the overall reach of the language used in it. Let us take a brief look at other languages that played an international role in the early twentieth century. Periodicals published in German, such as “Die Friedens-Warte” (a leading pacifist organ) or “Pan-Europa” (the periodical of the Pan-European movement of Count Coudenhove-Kalergi), had significant impact and were anything but negligible. The Luxemburgish “Les Temps Nouveaux / Die Neue Zeit”, established in 1911 with the aim of defending the ideas of progress, was bilingual. German was well-rooted in Luxemburg at the time, while the use of French seemed to require some explanation: “Le rôle social de la langue française est de première importance pour l’évolution de la mentalité universelle. La langue française est le plus puissant moyen d’éducation sociale.” [The social role of the French language is of prime importance for the evolution of the universal mentality. The French language is the most powerful means of social education.]82 English was also spoken by the intellectual elite, of course, and a considerable number of printed contributions to the debate about Europe were published in English in the UK, the USA and Scandinavia. It was these three languages that played the role of transfer media, but the edge was clearly with the French language. In the everyday work of the LDH and LIDH, letters or statements written in German were translated into or summarized in French, and we therefore find many hand-written sheets of paper containing such translations or summaries of German documents. This is especially true for the time when Milly Zirker functioned as secretary general of the LIDH. She was a native German, and Germans from the Paris chapter of the German league naturally wrote to her in their mother tongue. On the other hand, Victor Basch – a leading figure and president of the LDH from 1926 – was a university professor

82 (Freemason) J. Ribeaupierre: Chronique Générale. Les Temps Nouveaux. “Die Neue Zeit”. In: L’Acacia, August–September 1911, p. 546–547, quotation from Les Temps Nouveaux by Ribeaupierre.

82

III. Human Rights Leagues and the Idea of Europe During the Interwar Period

and specialist for German literature and philosophy. He was able to switch between the two languages, as was Zirker. For members of the LDH, the “Cahiers” were not included in the membership fee and had to be subscribed to individually (with the exception of members of the chapter or federation bureaus). Handwritten notes place the number of subscribers at 16,687 on 1 January 1935 and at 14,990 a year later.83 This corresponds to around 10% of all French league members. The periodical was generally published fortnightly, although for a while there were three issues per month. It seems that this regular rhythm was maintained punctually for nearly two decades (1920–1939). In 1940, a single final issue appeared in February before the publication was restarted in May 1945 after the Second World War. A complete set of issues is kept, not surprisingly, by the Bibliothèque de documentation internationale contemporaine (BDIC; renamed to La Contemporaine in spring 2018), which also holds the archives of the LDH and LIDH. The BDIC was founded as the Bibliothèque-Musée de la Guerre in 1917 and adopted the name used until 2018 in the 1920s. It collected, among others, all documents touching upon the subject of civil liberties, and as a result possesses a large number of printed sources connected to the LDH – all the more so because the LDH approached it in 1936 with the offer to complete its collection of league-related materials.84 This story shows that one had to think explicitly about posterity and its access to documentation. As there was a legal obligation to submit a copy of each published periodical to the National Library (Bibliothèque nationale de France, BnF), the LDH did so. The BnF catalogue suggests that its collection of issues of the “Cahiers” is likewise complete.85 The library of the League of Nations in Geneva, still open today, also collected the “Cahiers” systematically and possesses a complete collection from 1927 to 1963.86 The New York Public Library, on the other hand, first collected special brochures edited by the LDH,87 then asked for the August 1939 issue of the “Cahiers” at the moment when its publication was interrupted by the outbreak of the Second World War.88 The library seems to have received the periodical regularly only after the war. 83 BDIC, F delta res 798/46. 84 Dreyfus-Armand, Geneviève (2004): Les archives de la Ligue des droits de l’homme à la BDIC. In: Combe, Sonia, Cingal, Grégory, eds.: Retour de Moscou. Paris: La Découverte (Recherches), p. 9–16, here p. 12–13. 85 See the BNF homepage: http://www.bnf.fr/fr/acc/x.accueil.html. Use the search field to search for “Ligue des droits de l’homme” or “Les cahiers des droits de l’homme”. 86 Library homepage: http://www.unog.ch/library. Use the search field to search for “Les cahiers des droits de l’homme”. 87 Library homepage: https://www.nypl.org/. Use the search field to search for “Ligue des droits de l’homme” or “Les cahiers des droits de l’homme”. See BDIC, F delta res 798/48, letter by E. H. Anderson, director of the New York Public Library, N.Y., 15 January 1934, asking for “Compte rendu sténographique” of the annual congress of the LDH in 1932. 88 See BDIC, F delta res 798/48, letter to the LDH by the New York Public Library asking for the August 1939 issue of the “Cahiers”.

“Les Cahiers des Droits de l’Homme” (1920–1940)

83

Issues of the “Cahiers” in small and unsystematic numbers are held by several other libraries around the world.89 Since the human rights leagues exchanged their printed organs among each other, one can find individual issues in various human rights league archives.90 It is difficult to establish how many members of the LDH or subscribers kept issues together with their personal papers, or even whether these private archives still exist. Such individual copies may feature personal notes or annotations: Jules Prudhommeaux, for example, preserved a copy of the issue reporting on the LIDH congress in Brussels in 1926 that dealt with the United States of Europe together with other printed material concerning the same subject.91 Célestin Bouglé donated two separate issues of the “Cahiers” to the library of the École Normale Supérieure in Paris.92 In many countries, concerned ligueurs likely destroyed their personal archives before the agents of the German occupying forces or their national collaborators arrived.93 The LDH archives hold a vast collection of letters concerning the exchange of publications among associations, organizations, public institutions and the press. Most of these entities were located in France. Also preserved are several lists with addresses of individuals and collectives that received the “Cahiers” or selected issues. It often remains unclear whether this was by way of regular subscription, by way of the regular exchange of publications, or due to other reasons such as exceptional gifts.94 Each list refers to only one issue from the years 1933 to 1936 and thus offers a snapshot of sorts. Some, but not all, are dated with a handwritten note. All of this material can provide only selective impressions, however, and it is impossible to draw a graph of development of the dissemination of the “Cahiers” outside of France. That being said, much else can still be gleaned from the archive material: A few recipients of the “Cahiers” outside of France were located in French colonies and protectorates in which LDH chapters existed: Algiers, Casablanca, Constantine, Dakar, Nouvelles-Hébrides, Oran, Saigon and Togo. The lists also mention one recipient in Tokyo, a Mr. Okuyama.95 In Europe – not 89 Search with https://kvk.bibliothek.kit.edu/. KVK uses OPACs in Europe and the so-called Western world, but does not cover Africa and Asia. As the LDH established sections in French colonies and protectorates, it is necessary to search for these directly in, for example, the OPAC of the Bibliothèque Nationale du Royaume du Maroc. 90 An example is the archive of the Austrian league. It is housed by “QWIEN – Center for Queer History” and is currently being screened and sorted by Christopher Treiblmayr and Thomas Tretzmüller. 91 See BDIC, F delta res 720 (Fonds Prudhommeaux). 92 See the online catalogue of the ENS: https://halley.ens.fr/. Use the search field to search for “Les cahiers des droits de l’homme”. 93 See Combe, Sonia (2004): Paris-Moscou, aller-retour: historique d’une spoliation et d’une restitution. In: Combe/Cingal, eds., Retour de Moscou, op. cit., p. 17–26. 94 The BDIC possesses slip boxes with a card index of around 13,000 subscribers. I consider the lists in F delta res 798/46-47 and additional correspondence in F delta res 798/48 to be more informative than the card index, however. 95 This could be Seiji Okuyama, delegate to the League of Nations General Assembly (Representative), Forth Ordinary Assembly, see http://www.lonsea.de/pub/person/13032.

84

III. Human Rights Leagues and the Idea of Europe During the Interwar Period

counting France – most of the addressees were members of a sister league under the LIDH. Addressees are listed for the following countries (in alphabetical order): Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, Germany, Greece, the Netherlands, Luxemburg, Poland and Portugal. In most cases, the recipients were located in the respective capital. Further copies went to Switzerland (Bern and Geneva – persons connected to the League of Nations and its supporting organizations), London, New York and to a single addressee in Denmark. There are a total of around 40 different recipients altogether – not counting France and its colonies and protectorates, of course.96 Individual postal consignments could include more than one copy of a “Cahiers” issue. A document dated 27 November 1924 and concerning the German league, for example, asks to increase the number of copies sent to the league from 25 to 45.97 Another document, a postcard dated 5 March 1940 and sent by a Parisian bookseller serving overseas clients, refers to a female subscriber in Montevideo, Uruguay, who had not received the “Cahiers” since August 1939.98 The lady was apparently unaware that printing of the “Cahiers” had been interrupted by the start of the war. Was this a unique case or not? It is impossible to know. The lists also include leading ligueurs from leagues operating in exile, such as Boris Mirkin-Getzevich and Jacob L. Rubinstein (Russian league). Many international organizations maintained an office in France, usually in Paris, and received the “Cahiers” – such as the Carnegie Foundation in Europe.99 The Masonic review “L’Acacia. Revue d’Études et d’Action Maçonniques et Sociales” also requested an exchange with the LDH’s periodical,100 and the German embassy to France in Paris is likewise among the addressees.101 Other organizations located in foreign countries received the “Cahiers” as well; in the early 1920s, these included the Institut für Auswärtige Politik in Hamburg, which published the review “Europäische Gespräche” (1922–1933) under editor-in-chief Prof. Albrecht Mendelssohn-Bartholdy.102 Also in Hamburg was the Hamburgisches WeltWirtschafts-Archiv (Zentralstelle des Hamburgischen Kolonialinstituts), which offered an exchange of issues with its weekly “Wirtschaftsdienst”.103 Another request for exchange was submitted by “The Jewish Morning Journal” in New 96 For this paragraph, I cumulated information from BDIC, F delta res 798/45, 798/46, 798/47, 798/48. 97 BDIC, F delta res 798/47. 98 BDIC, F delta res 798/48. The online catalogue of the “Biblioteca nacional de Uruguay” returns nothing when searched for “Les cahiers des droits de l’homme”. 99 Document in BDIC, F delta res 798/46. 100 Document in BDIC, F delta res 798/47. 101 Document in BDIC, F delta res 798/46. 102 Letter in French, 30 June 1923, BDIC, F delta res 798/47. The LDH confirms the exchange. On European reviews in the interwar period, see the report by Trebitsch, Michel (1994): Les revues européennes de l’entre-deux-guerres. In: Vingtième Siècle. Revue d’histoire, No 44: La culture politique en France depuis De Gaulle, p. 135–138, DOI: 10.3406/xxs.1994.3123. 103 BDIC, F delta res 798/46, letter in German with French translation below the German text, 12 February 1925.

“Les Cahiers des Droits de l’Homme” (1920–1940)

85

York.104 Rudolf Goldscheid, co-founder of the Austrian League for Human Rights in 1926 and editor-in-chief of “Die Friedens-Warte”, wrote to Henri Guernut in November 1923 that despite the LDH’s agreement to send the “Cahiers” to him in Vienna, he had not received any issues yet.105 Recipients of the “Cahiers” in New York included Mr. Baldwin106 of the American Civil Liberties Union as well as the Bureau of Jewish Social Research. Last but not least, the preserved archive material also includes correspondence with authors – likewise a somewhat selective assortment. It is impossible to say how many authors from foreign countries offered manuscripts to the editors of the “Cahiers” (the Commission des Cahiers) that were ultimately not published. The authors in the printed “Cahiers” comprise members of various human rights leagues affiliated with the LIDH as well as, of course, French authors from the LDH – largely but not exclusively members of the Comité Central or of one of the commissions (Commission féministe, Commission coloniale, etc.). Some information can be gleaned from the lists of received books, among which only a small number concern non-French authors who were translated into French.107 In conclusion, the “Cahiers” had an international audience even beyond Europe and the French overseas territories. They served a demand for information on a consumption level situated between daily newspapers on the one hand and non-fiction books on the other, reaching (at least) a public attuned to human rights issues and thus to European federation topics. In addition to LDH members and chapters in France and its colonies and protectorates, it addressed an international (primarily European) public, and it embedded the European issue into its broader fundamental concept: human rights and democracy all over the world. These circumstances make the “Cahiers” an extremely interesting source of information in regard to the debate on a United States of Europe and similar projects. A final critical remark in this context relates to the question to what degree the content published in the “Cahiers” claimed representativeness. In any case, the published content should be regarded as selective, meaning that the “Cahiers” did not reflect the entire activity of the LDH and LIDH, but simultaneously did not exclude controversial opinions. They also provided information on individuals on whose behalf the LDH interceded with public authorities, law courts and the like. Today, we would classify such information as “private” or “personal data” that should not be published in a periodical. Each issue comprised a number of articles dealing with a general topic indicated on the cover page. Nearly a third of each 104 BDIC, F delta res 798/47, request dated 1 November 1923. 105 BDIC, F delta res 798/47, letter in French, 29 November 1923. 106 This is presumably Roger Nash Baldwin, a leading figure of the American Civil Liberties Union and well-known pacifist. He later co-founded the International League for the Rights of Man, which is currently being studied by Christopher Treiblmayr in connection with his research on the Austrian League for Human Rights. For basic information on Baldwin, see Cottrell, Robert (2016): Roger Nash Baldwin and the American Civil Liberties Union. New York, NY: Columbia University Press. 107 See the printed lists in Les Cahiers des Droits de l’Homme. In addition, see BDIC, F delta res 798/47, booklet listing books received between 25 November 1935 and 27 May 1937.

86

III. Human Rights Leagues and the Idea of Europe During the Interwar Period

issue was reserved for reports on the meetings of the Comité Central of the LDH and that of the LIDH, as well as on the activities of the regional federations and local chapters. Book reviews and lists of received books completed each issue. Over the years, the articles mirror the subject matters the LDH and LIDH focused on, and the assumption of representativeness therefore seems admissible. The articles were not necessarily original publications that could not be found in other periodicals as well, however – some were original contributions, some were not, with footnotes informing the readers accordingly. The content itself should not be regarded as a source or outcome of original thinking. While this was certainly sometimes the case, it is not what makes the “Cahiers” a fascinating primary source in regard to the idea of a united Europe. Rather, the reason is that the periodical can be contextualized with its readers, as I have done it in the preceding paragraphs. My analysis presented on the following pages will reveal the coherence of the idea of Europe as we find it showcased in the “Cahiers” from 1920 to 1932. After this period, i.e. in 1933 to 1939, the topic was less prominently positioned in the journal – but by no means off the agenda of the LDH and LIDH, as other archival material proves. If coherence maintained throughout several years is an aspect of representativeness, then the “Cahiers” constitute a representative primary source for a period of more than a decade. Its representativeness is probably augmented by the fact that Europeanists who were not necessarily members of a human rights league, like Christian Frederik Heerfordt (1871–1953) from Denmark, maintained correspondence with the LDH and LIDH regarding the subject of European unification.108 Therefore, I will intersperse the content as published in the “Cahiers” with complementary information from the archives of the LDH and LIDH.109 HUMAN RIGHTS LEAGUES AND THE IDEA OF A UNITED STATES OF EUROPE The ligueurs were eager to keep any idea on European federation, whatever its actual future constitutional form might be, within the context of the League of Nations. They did not wish to provoke a rivalry between the two concepts. Their preferred horizon was that of the entirety of humankind, and many speakers and authors within the human rights leagues as well as outside of them hoped that humanity would one day succeed in establishing not only a European, but also an American, an African and an Asian federation or union as part of the League of Nations. This did not preclude a certain pragmatism, as we can see in the case of Rudolf Goldscheid – who proposed (see below) starting with an economic union

108 Heerfordt had published “A New Europe”. The original edition was in Danish; it was translated into English in 1925 and into German in 1926. 109 The mentioned content is to be found in BDIC, F delta res 798/54, 798/55, 798/56, 798/57, 798/58, 798/59, 798/60.

Human Rights Leagues and the Idea of a United States of Europe

87

between France, Germany and England (the term “UK” was never used; it was always “England” or, in French, “Angleterre”). The notion of establishing individual continental federations under the roof of the League of Nations resembled a utopian idea. There existed only one example of such an entity, namely the Organization of American States created in 1890 as an “International Union of American Republics”.110 It was sometimes mentioned in speeches and articles, but was far from being a “Star of Bethlehem” guiding Europeans. In other words, the broad and to some extent utopian idealistic horizon did not affect the historically grown Eurocentric approach that many statements were based upon. Of course, during the interwar period, this was simply pragmatic. As early as 1921, French delegates to the General Assembly of the International Union of League of Nations Associations in Geneva proposed the creation of a European League of Nations within the framework of the international League of Nations. They believed that the concept of a universal community of nations on which the League of Nations was founded could not yet work.111 An article written by Victor Basch for the “Cahiers” in their first year (1920) illustrates this pragmatic Eurocentrism, and it is worth quoting one of its key paragraphs in full: L’idée même de la Société des Nations est très ancienne : elle a été conçue et en partie réalisée par les Grecs, elle a été reprise par l’Eglise catholique, puis par Henri IV, par Leibnitz et par Bernardin de Saint-Pierre et a reçu sa forme définitive dans l’Essai sur la Paix perpétuelle de Kant. Cette idée la voici. Etant donné que les Etats constituent des individualités, douées des mêmes instincts anti-sociaux et sociaux que les individus et que, par conséquent, il règne entre eux un antagonisme primordial qui se manifeste par les guerres, les armements et les incalculables misères qu’ils entraînent, il est naturel et nécessaire qu’après des tentatives sans nombre, les Etats sortent de l’état sauvage où ils ont vécu et tentent de fonder une Société des Etats où chacun d’entre eux, quelque faible qu’il soit, doive sa pleine sécurité et la jouissance de tous ses droits, non à sa propre puissance et son propre jugement, mais à une Fédération de tous les peuples, à leurs forces réunies et aux décisions rendues d’après les lois de leur volonté consciente. C’est cette conception que, bien avant la guerre, la Ligue des Droits de l’Homme a faite sienne, c’est celle qu’elle a opposée à la conception plus timide qui a prévalu dans les Conventions de La Haye. [The very idea of the League of Nations is very old: it was conceived and partly realized by the Greeks, it was taken over by the Catholic Church, then by Henry IV, by Leibnitz and by Bernardin de Saint-Pierre, and received its final form in Kant’s Essay on Perpetual Peace. The idea is as follows: Since States constitute individualities endowed with the same antisocial and social instincts as individuals and, consequently, as there is a primordial antagonism between them that manifests itself in the wars, armaments and incalculable miseries, it is natural and necessary that, after countless attempts, the States should emerge from the savage state in which they lived and attempt to found a Society of States in which each of them, no matter how weak, should have its full security and the enjoyment of all its rights, due not to its own power and judgment but to a federation of all peoples, to their united forces, and to decisions made according to the laws of their conscious will. 110 See http://www.oas.org/en/about/who_we_are.asp (accessed 11 September 2018). 111 Guieu, Le rameau et le glaive, op. cit., p. 71.

88

III. Human Rights Leagues and the Idea of Europe During the Interwar Period It is this concept that, well before the war, the League of Human Rights has made its own, it is the one it opposed to the more timid conception that prevailed in the Hague Conventions.]112

Basch’s interpretation of what constitutes a state is telling and helps to understand why nearly all the authors and speakers who left traces in the “Cahiers” or elsewhere did not believe that the concept of the nation could be overcome. In Basch’s article, the prehistory of the idea of a league of nations is based exclusively on European thinkers (in the context of political philosophy, the Americas were part of the European tradition of thinking at the time, not outside of it). He does not address the epistemological problem arising from the fact that the idea of a league of nations was a European and therefore Eurocentric one, not a universal one. It is not surprising that Basch argued as he did, but one must be aware that the fundamental idealistic context of human rights in which he is to be understood – and which was considered universal by the ligueurs – was rooted entirely in historical Eurocentrism. This is important because we will see below how it also influenced the ligueurs’ concept of colonialism. In 1922, the LDH tabled the subject of the reconstruction of Europe – “La reconstruction de l’Europe”113 – when its Comité Central placed “la Politique Européenne” on the agenda of its meeting on 17 February 1922. The discussion pointed out that Europe had to unite economically, that no country was to be excluded, and that Russia (“Russia” being used as the name for the country throughout, sometimes with the addition of modifiers like “under Soviet rule” or simply “Soviet Russia”) and the USA should be part of it.114 The German ligueur Otto Lehmann-Russbüldt introduced the aspect of a “spiritual revolution of Europe” on the occasion of a visit by the Bund Neues Vaterland/German League for Human Rights to the Comité Central of the LDH on 3 January 1922.115 On 20 April, it was once again Victor Basch, then vice-president of the LDH, who published an article on the subject of “La reconstruction de l’Europe” in which he stated that a great number of LDH chapters had requested the topic for the annual LDH congress in that year. A point of reference was the Genoa conference that took place from 10 April to 19 May 1922. Its aim was to re-establish a functioning international economic and financial system. Basch outlined various political, economic and moral aspects of European reconstruction and emphasized the need for disarmament in his article, concluding the following:

112 Les Cahiers des Droits de l’Homme, 1920, No 5, 5 March, article by Victor Basch on “La Société des Nations”, p. 11. 113 Les Cahiers des Droits de l’Homme, 1922. 114 Les Cahiers des Droits de l’Homme, 1922, p. 66. 115 Les Cahiers des Droits de l’Homme, 1922, p. 112.

Human Rights Leagues and the Idea of a United States of Europe

89

L’idée-force sur laquelle repose la démocratie c’est que, grâce à l’éducation, grâce à l’amélioration des conditions matérielles du plus grand nombre, les hommes, dignes de ce nom, et les peuples sont destinés à devenir les uns pour les autres des frères. Si c’est là une mystique, c’est sur cette mystique que repose l’idée de civilisation. [The key idea on which democracy is based is that, thanks to education, thanks to the improvement of the material conditions of the greatest number, the men [who are] worthy of the name and the peoples are destined to become brothers for each other. If this is a mystique, it is on this mystique that the idea of civilization rests.]116

A month later, two authors from the Union Syndicale des Techniciens de l’Industrie, du Commerce et de l’Agriculture, Mr. Ripert and Mr. Francq, published a follow-up article likewise entitled “La reconstitution de l’Europe”. They stipulated l’instauration d’une économie collective s’appliquant à l’Europe comme une entité ; la répartition internationale des matières premières et l’abaissement des douanes et des frontières économiques ; une organisation nouvelle basée sur la solidarité industrielle des peuples de l’Europe (…). [the establishment of a collective economy applying to Europe as an entity; the international distribution of raw materials and the lowering of customs and economic borders; a new organization based on the industrial solidarity of the peoples of Europe (…).] 117

The annual congress of the LDH would indeed adopt a resolution recommending economic cooperation. No country should be excluded – neither Russia nor Germany, neither Bulgaria nor Turkey. All countries should be treated as equals. This represented the difference between the notion of Europe according to human rights activists on the one hand and that of the political class on the other: The political class was not yet willing to accept Soviet Russia or Germany as equals and partners. The resolution also stipulated that tous les Etats ont intérêt à ce que l’Europe soit reconstruite d’après un plan d’ensemble qui, tout en ménageant les droits de chacun d’entre eux, tienne compte de la solidarité qui les relie les uns aux autres. [all states have an interest in Europe being rebuilt according to an overall plan which, while regarding the rights of all of them, takes into account the solidarity that binds them together.]118

Disarmament was considered essential for successful cooperation. Other keywords were “famille des nations” and “régénération morale”, with the latter evoking Lehmann-Russbüldt’s “spiritual revolution” as well as the League of Nations’ Committee on Moral Disarmament and its International Commission on Intellectual Co-operation. 1922 was the year of the foundation of the LIDH, and to some extent, this signified a new level in the Europeanization of human rights activities. The first international LIDH congress took place in 1922 and the second in 1923, both in 116 Les Cahiers des Droits de l’Homme, 1922, p. 209. 117 Les Cahiers des Droits de l’Homme, 1922, p. 246. 118 Les Cahiers des Droits de l’Homme, 1922, p. 292.

90

III. Human Rights Leagues and the Idea of Europe During the Interwar Period

Paris. In 1924, the series of articles on the subject of European co-operation was continued: Mr. Ripert, who had already published the abovementioned article on economic reconstruction in 1922 was given the possibility of continuing his analysis. What he outlined was, in fact, very similar to the single European market existing in the present-day European Union. Ripert asserted that a United States of Europe was a condition for economic reconstruction.119 In November 1925, Émile Kahn summarized – in an unusually long article of about 17 pages once again under the title “La reconstruction de l’Europe” – all the ideas that the readers of the “Cahiers” had been presented with since 1922.120 1926 was the year of the LIDH congress in Brussels on the subject of a United States of Europe. Three of its four sessions, held on June 26 and 27, were dedicated to the concept of USE and similar topics. A detailed analysis of the work and results of this congress may help to better understand the ties believed by the human rights leagues and their activists to exist between the idea of Europe and the notion of democracy and human rights. An extensive summary of the proceedings – partly verbatim, partly not – was published in the “Cahiers” on 25 September 1926.121 Arguably, the discussions were reported in an abbreviated fashion, with French contributions appearing privileged in the summary; it must be stated clearly, however, that the report gave no pretence of delivering the minutes of the congress. In closing, it thanked Aline Ménard-Dorian for the “incomparable dévouement avec lequel elle dirige les destinées de la Ligue internationale” [incomparable dedication with which she leads the destinies of the International League]. An overall French predominance cannot be denied. The first session was traditionally reserved for the leagues and their “national” reports. In effect, this entailed a broad tour d’horizon of the present political situation in Europe. Rudolf Goldscheid was elected president of this first session and briefly reported on the “reorganization” of the Austrian league that he represented. Neither the list of leagues represented at the congress nor their reports followed an alphabetical order. Although it is not mentioned explicitly, it is not unlikely that the order of the reports reflected the seating arrangements. Datiko Sharashidze, a journalist, member of the government of Georgia in exile122 and representative of the Georgian league in exile, detailed the situation in his country under Soviet rule. Mr. Mink, representative of the Czechoslovakian league, referred to a supposedly long tradition of democratic ideas in the Czech regions provided by the “followers of Jan Hus”. Ubaldo Triaca represented the Italian league in exile and described how fascism was developing in Italy. The 119 Les Cahiers des Droits de l’Homme, 1924, p. 595–598. 120 Les Cahiers des Droits de l’Homme, 1925, p. 555–572. 121 Les Cahiers des Droits de l’Homme, 1926, No 18, 25 September, p. 411–430. I have followed the order of the summary strictly, i.e. all quotations are to be found here in the original order of their appearance. 122 Proper names were usually spelled according to their French representations in Les Cahiers des Droits de l’Homme. For a brief profile of Sharashidze (“Charachidzé” in French), see Naquet, Pour l’humanité, op. cit., p. 512.

Human Rights Leagues and the Idea of a United States of Europe

91

next to speak was Alexandre Khatissian from the Armenian league in exile. He spoke about the difficult situation of this country under Soviet rule, the behaviour of Turkey and the consequences of the Armenian Genocide [wording W.S.] in 1915. Constantin G. Costa-Foru, the speaker for the Romanian league, had recently been the victim of an anti-Semitic attack in Bucharest that ended with physical violence against his person. This illustrated strikingly the state of affairs in Romania at the time. For the Portuguese league, Mr. De Almada Negreiros sketched a successful period of activities promoting the strengthening of the civil society in his country. Nicolai Avxentieff, president of the Russian league in exile, was tasked with giving an account of the gloomy situation in Soviet Russia. He emphasized the problem of abandoned children. Mr. S. Posner’s report on the Polish league was full of hope: The Polish league, he said, would fight clericalism, militarism and excessive nationalism in Poland. Mr. S. Oekonomos of the Greek league dealt with geopolitical problems in the Balkans, namely with the issue of the Dodecanese islands. Robert Kuczynski of the German league focused his brief report on his league’s activities supporting the reconciliation between Poland and Germany. Mr. La Fontaine, a Belgian senator, represented the league of Haiti, which had been occupied by the USA. He described the ruling dictatorship established and protected by the United States. The Bulgarian league was represented by Henri Guernut, secretary general of the LDH, who quoted a letter written by Venelin Ganev, president of the Bulgarian league, that detailed how oppression was progressing in his country. The historian Alphonse Aulard talked about the activities of the LDH, and Maurice Wilmotte, the representative of the Belgian league, drew parallels between his league and the French one. Mr. Ortega and Mr. Unamuno, the delegates of the Spanish league, had been detained at the border and arrived late; they briefly spoke about the situation in Spain at the beginning of the second session. Thereafter, Count Michel Karolyi of the Hungarian league highlighted the problems Hungarian emigrants were facing due to their government denying them passports. The Luxemburgish league was present, but apparently did not deliver a report. The English Union of Democratic Control123 had sent two observers, Mrs. E. Bethel and Robert Deel. Following the Spanish and Hungarian contributions, the congress adopted several resolutions: “Contre le fascisme en Italie”, “Pour la liberté du peuple arménien”, “Pour la Géorgie opprimée”, “Contre la dictature en Haïti”, “La question du Dodécanèse” and “Le statut des émigrés”. All this corresponds to the stipulations of the statutes of the human rights leagues and offers a vivid example of “Europe vécue”. The next topic, which would dominate three sessions of the congress, was the United States of Europe. In fact, after the initial talks by Alphonse Aulard and Rudolf Goldscheid, the question was raised whether human rights leagues should actually concern them123 For a brief profile, see Monger, David (2015): Union of Democratic Control. In: 1914–1918online. International Encyclopedia of the First World War, ed. by Ute Daniel, Peter Gatrell, Oliver Janz, Heather Jones, Jennifer Keene, Alan Kramer, and Bill Nasson, issued by Freie Universität Berlin, DOI: 10.15463/ie1418.10598.

92

III. Human Rights Leagues and the Idea of Europe During the Interwar Period

selves with this issue. The conclusion was that they should, and corresponding talks and debates continued throughout the congress and during subsequent years. The “Cahiers” regularly published articles dealing with the subject as well.124 Alphonse Aulard, historian of the French Revolution, introduced the subject. As early as 20 April 1920, he had published an article on “Les États-Unis d’Europe seraient un premier pas vers la Société Universelle des Nations” in the periodical “Le Progrès civique”.125 He asserted that pursuing the creation of a United States of Europe was not indicative of utopian thought or romanticism, and proceeded to quote the former Austrian chancellor Ignaz Seipel, who had given a speech in Paris a few days earlier in which he had expressed the desire that “l’Europe actuelle se transforme et s’améliore jusqu’à devenir une communauté effective, destinée à assurer le bien-être de tous” [Europe should be transforming and improving to become an effective community, to ensure the well-being of all]. Aulard also referred to other famous voices like those of Henri de Saint-Simon (1814126), Victor Hugo (1851127, 1869128, 1870129) and Charles Lemonnier (1867 and 1872130), all of whom had emphasized the economic question among others. According to Aulard, the reason why human rights leagues should engage with the idea of a United States of Europe was the following: Nous sommes convaincus, nous ligueurs, que les droits de l’homme, la démocratie, la fraternité, la justice, les principes dont nous sommes les défenseurs ne peuvent régner ou être restaurés en Europe, pour et par la paix, que si les peuples de ce continent, se fédèrent, à la fois économiquement et politiquement, comme on voit fédérés pour leur Bonheur démocratique les peuples de l’Amérique du Nord et les peuples de la Suisse. [We are convinced, we leaguers, that the rights of man, democracy, fraternity, justice, the principles of which we are the defenders can reign or be restored in Europe, for and by peace, only if the peoples of this continent federate both economically and politically, as we see federated for their democratic happiness the peoples of North America and the peoples of Switzerland.]131

A United States of Europe, he stated, would not threaten the nations or the nation state as such and would be established in the womb of the League of Nations. From the point of view of the human rights leagues, the problem was effectively not the nation state itself. National democracies, they thought, would co-operate on the basis of fraternité, while fascist states would start wars. One of the models regularly quoted by Victor Basch was to be found in Immanuel Kant’s 124 See below. 125 Guieu, Le rameau et le glaive, op. cit., p. 71. 126 Saint-Simon, Claude-Henri de (1814): Réorganisation de la société européenne. Paris. Reference by Aulard. 127 Speech at the French Législative, 17 July 1851. Reference by Aulard. 128 Letter to the peace congress in Lausanne in 1869. Reference by Aulard. 129 14 July 1870, symbolic planting of an oak tree in his garden at Hauteville House. Reference by Aulard. 130 1867: Peace congress in Switzerland; 1872: publication of Les États-Unis d’Europe in Paris. Reference by Aulard. 131 Les Cahiers des Droits de l’Homme, 1926, p. 418.

Human Rights Leagues and the Idea of a United States of Europe

93

treaty on perpetual peace. In 1935, nearly ten years after the Brussels congress, Basch would write the following in the journal “Messages aux éducateurs”: Une seule voie de salut : celle qu’avaient entrevue déjà les Grecs, en instituant leurs amphictyonies, celle que, parmi tous les penseurs, a le mieux définie le philosophe allemand Emmanuel [sic!] Kant. Je voudrais que, le 11 Novembre132, fussent lues et commentées, dans toutes les écoles de France, les pages maîtresses de son essai sur la Paix Perpétuelle. [Only one way of salvation: that which the Greeks had already seen by instituting their amphictyonies, that which the German philosopher Emmanuel [sic!] Kant defined best among all the thinkers. I would like, on the 11 th of November, to be read and commented on in all the schools of France the master pages of his essay on Perpetual Peace.]133

The contradiction was not perceived as existing between the nation state and Europe, but between fascism and democratic Europe. In the mirror of the reports on fascist regimes in Germany, Hungary, Italy and Spain delivered to the LIDH and/or to the LDH by various human rights leagues in the years after the congress of 1926, those fascist governments looked very similar and were regularly characterized as “barbarisms”. Today we see the distinctions that have to be made between National Socialism, Italian fascism, the Spanish Falange and fascist movements in eastern Central Europe more clearly, 134 but the human rights activists of the period were combatting the same problems everywhere: arbitrary trials, the death penalty, torture, defamation, terror spread by the state, the oppression of minorities, lack of judicial assistance for refugees and emigrants, illegal goings-on in European colonies, erosion of democracy, discrimination of women, and many more. Nevertheless, there was a certain awareness of distinctions that needed to be made. Still in 1926, on 25 August, Alphonse Aulard published in the “Cahiers” an article discussing “Le Fascisme et les Droits de l’Homme”.135 He described the situation in the Bolshevik Soviet Union on the one hand and in Italy, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Bulgaria, Greece and Spain on the other. As a historian, he was aware – naturally, as one might argue – of the variants fascism assumed depending on the respective country it existed in. Interestingly, Aulard already classified the pre-Franco Spain of 1926 as “fascist”. Spain used yperite (more commonly 132 This refers to the end of the First World War in France. 133 Basch, Victor (1935): La Paix perpétuelle, règne de la raison et de la justice. In: Messages aux éducateurs, p. 245–46. 134 There is abundant research literature elucidating the multifaceted aspects of fascisms in Europe. Regarding eastern Central Europe, see Horel, Catherine; Sandu, Traian; Taubert Fritz, eds. (2006): La périphérie du fascisme. Spécification d’un modèle fasciste au sein des sociétés agraires, le cas de l’Europe centrale entre les deux guerres. Paris. See also Sandu, Traian, ed. (2010): Vers un profil convergent des fascismes? “Nouveau consensus” et religion politique en Europe centrale. Paris. More recently and with a special focus on Hungary, see Horel, Catherine (2014): L’amiral Horthy. Régent de Hongrie. Paris. See also the biography of the Romanian Corneliu Codreanu by Schmitt, Oliver Jens (2016): Căpitan Codreanu. Aufstieg und Fall des rumänischen Faschistenführers. Vienna. 135 Aulard, Alphonse (1926): Le Fascisme et les Droits de l’Homme. In: Les Cahiers des Droits de l’Homme, 1926, No 16, 25 August.

94

III. Human Rights Leagues and the Idea of Europe During the Interwar Period

known as mustard gas) during the Rif War waged in Morocco from 1921 to 1926). Let us return to the Brussels congress and the topic of the United States of Europe, where the next speaker after Aulard was Rudolf Goldscheid. Goldscheid’s speech was summarized in the “Cahiers”, but it appears that the manuscript had previously also been published in German in the journal “Die FriedensWarte” in September 1926.136 He emphasized the economic point of view: Borders should be opened, customs duties abolished or substantially diminished, and persons, ideas and material products should be allowed to circulate unobstructed. He also highlighted the aspect of manpower. The productive phase in a human being’s life (i.e. the phase between childhood and unproductive seniority) should likewise be taken into consideration to enhance the lifetime balance of productivity, and the same principles should apply to colonized peoples. Goldscheid asserted that economic cooperation among European countries and peoples would contribute to disarmament. He referred copiously to other speakers, e.g. to Louis Albert Joseph Loucheur137, who had given a speech on economic issues to the League of Nations in autumn 1925 and was known for his support of the notion of a USE. Loucheur was a member of Coudenhove-Kalergi’s Pan-European Union. Goldscheid then proceeded to provide a systematic list of questions to be answered. It included the creation of a European customs union and a common currency, the harmonization of taxes, free movement of persons, a common European defence policy and joint army, the harmonization of the constitutions of the European countries and cooperation in education issues. He also mentioned “social” and “racial hygiene”, two much-discussed topics in the 1920s. Even Tomáš Garrigue Masaryk, first president of the newly created Czechoslovakian Republic, addressed them in his famous book on “New Europe”, which was known to many ligueurs.138 The discussion commenced after Goldscheid’s talk with the delegate of the English Union of Democratic Control, Robert Deel, asking whether England and Russia were expected to be a part of this federated Europe and how one envisioned the relationship between a United States of Europe and the League of Nations? Mr. Renaudel from France suggested leaving the USE issue to the League of Nations, voicing his doubts whether the human rights leagues were called upon to engage with the subject. At the current time, he stated, a United States of Europe could not encompass all European countries without the risk of provoking new wars. This statement was part of a controversy that would only be decided after the Second World War, namely whether willing countries should be allowed to initiate the process of European federation while others would not participate 136 Goldscheid, Rudolf (1926): Der Ausbau des Paktes von Locarno und der Zusammenschluss Europas. In: Die Friedens-Warte, vol. 9, p. 270–273. 137 For more information on Loucheur, see http://www.lonsea.de/pub/person/1970. 138 Masaryk, Tomáš Garrigue (1918): The New Europe. The Slav Standpoint. London: Eyre and Spottiswoode.

Human Rights Leagues and the Idea of a United States of Europe

95

immediately, but could join in later. The Italian delegate, Mr. Triaca, underlined the similarities between European peoples, asserting that they could live together. The Hungarian representative Count Karolyi pointed out that fascist countries could not be part of a USE and that Russia would not consent to joining a group including fascist states. All these questions refer to the lively discussions that all advocates of a United States of Europe during the 1920s were engrossed in. Obviously, the ligueurs meeting in Brussels at the LIDH congress were well-informed. Since many of them were members of more than one civil society association, they were regularly involved in debates on European issues, attended various conferences and read treatises published by Europeanists from all parts of Europe. Jules Prudhommeaux, for instance, a member of the LDH and secretary general of the LIDH from 1936 to 1938, collected newspaper articles and treatises on the subject of USE.139 In his collection, we find a booklet written by Sir Max Waechter and entitled “How to Make War Impossible: The United States of Europe” (no date, but presumably printed in 1922) as well as another by Dr. H. C. Müller entitled “International European Law: An Essay on the Future of United States of Europe” (The Hague, 1924). Both essays were originally conceived before the First World War and revised for printing in the early 1920s. The third session of the 1926 congress in Brussels was dedicated to the European monetary problems. The topic was introduced by Roger Picard, jurist and member of the LDH as well as of the Comité Central from 1923 to 1948.140 Picard thought that Goldscheid’s ideas went too far, and that the human rights leagues should focus on the elimination of injustice and promotion of justice wherever possible. He pleaded for the European countries to establish a common monetary and financial policy. The next speaker was Robert Kuczynski from the German league, whose task was to speak on the problem of a European customs union. Like Picard before him, Kuczynski drew comparisons with the United States of America, whose economic performance not only attracted millions of immigrants but had also made them a model for the idea of a United States of Europe since the first half of the nineteenth century. He also pointed out that South America, Canada, India, China and Japan had gained economic independence from Europe. Therefore, Europe would have to unite economically in order to survive. Similar concerns had been expressed by Count Coudenhove-Kalergi in his book “Pan-Europa”. Coudenhove-Kalergi is not quoted in the congress summary published in the “Cahiers”, but his writings were certainly known to the ligueurs, as he is mentioned in other articles. In 1928, Victor Basch – in an article on “Le Malaise Européen” – mentioned him alongside several personalities engaged with the idea of Pan-Europe or a European federation.141

139 See BDIC, Fonds Prudhommeaux, F delta res 720; F delta res 733–736. 140 See Naquet, Pour l’humanité, op. cit., p. 30, footnote 78. 141 Basch, Victor (1928): Le Malaise Européen. In: Les Cahiers des Droits de l’Homme, No 32, 20 December, p. 762. Article first published in La Volonté.

96

III. Human Rights Leagues and the Idea of Europe During the Interwar Period

Mr. Maurice Wilmotte142, president of the Belgian league and host of the congress, continued the series of reports on various subjects with a talk on “intellectual cooperation and organization of peace”. He emphasized the need for an “esprit européen” in regard to the media, books and education. This “European spirit” was to be the opposite of the nationalism scathed by Wilmotte. He notably cited historians responsible for education in nationalism, among whom he named Georg Friedrich Wilhelm Hegel, Heinrich von Treitschke and even Karl Lamprecht for Germany; for France, Adolphe Thiers, François Guizot and Numa Denis Fustel de Coulanges. Wilmotte subsequently outlined the benefits of opportunities for intellectual exchange as provided by scientific congresses, student exchange programs and the like. Connecting people, he argued, represented one of the most effective ways of engendering the desired European spirit; he explicitly cited the Association internationale des Académies, the Pen Club that had organized congresses in London (1924), Paris (1925) and Berlin (1926), and the Institut de coopération intellectuelle as examples. Wilmotte concluded his talk with an optimistic outlook: Mais pas à pas, par des accords officiels (et aussi privés) on peut entrevoir le moment où professeurs, étudiants, écrivains, peintres, sculpteurs, musiciens circuleront librement à travers l’Europe et – ce qui fut réalisé sommairement par les clercs du moyen-âge – collaboreront à une unité mentale, n’excluant ni la diversité, ni la libre spontanéité. [But step by step, by official agreements (and also private ones) we can see the moment when teachers, students, writers, painters, sculptors, musicians will circulate freely throughout Europe and – as was done summarily by the clerics of the Middle Ages – will collaborate for a mental unity, excluding neither diversity nor free spontaneity.] 143

He finished by proposing that the ministries of foreign affairs should be complemented by departments for intellectual relations – a proposition that provoked a vivid and controversial debate, with some fearing that intellectual matters would thereby be subjected to political control, which in turn would end intellectual freedom. The concept of an “esprit européen” seems to have been used frequently in the discussions about Europe. In 1914, Louis Dumont-Wilden (1875–1963), a journalist from Brussels, had published a treatise entitled “L’Esprit européen”.144 Like many others after him, he combined his “esprit européen” with “solidarité” and an “élite cosmopolite”. In 1933, Émile Borel, the leading figure of the Comité Français and the Comité fédéral de coopération européenne145, member of the 142 Wilmotte was president of the Association Internationale des Écrivains de Langue Française in 1936–1938: http://www.lonsea.de/pub/person/3725. 143 Les Cahiers des Droits de l’Homme, Brussels congress, op. cit., p. 427. 144 Dumont-Wilden, Louis (1914): L’Esprit européen. Paris. See extract in Stelandre, Yves, ed. (1992): L’idée européenne dans l’entre-deux-guerres. Recueil de textes réunis à l’initiative de Michel Dumoulin par Yves Stelandre. Louvain-la-Neuve, p. 9–15. 145 Guieu, Jean-Michel (2003): Le Comité fédéral de Coopération européenne: l’action méconnue d’une organisation internationale privée en faveur de l’union de l’Europe dans les années trente (1928–1940). In: Schirmann, Sylvain, ed. (2003): Organisations internationales et architectures européennes (1929–1939), Metz, p. 73–91.

Human Rights Leagues and the Idea of a United States of Europe

97

Comité Central of the LDH and part of the French delegation to the 1948 congress in The Hague, organized a convention on the topic of the “esprit européen” at the Institut International de Coopération Intellectuelle. Paul Valéry was charged with chairing the debate. The congress decided to establish a Société d’études européennes, which would not produce any notable output, however.146 Borel, Valéry and others like Joseph Paul-Boncour had also been members of a jury that was charged, in 1930, with the evaluation of more than 500 essays dealing with the question of European federation (Etats Fédérés de l’Europe) and submitted in the course of an international competition for a prize awarded by the “Revue des Vivants”.147 Robert Mangin won first prize; after the Second World War, he would become the president of the Cercles Fédéralistes et Socialistes pour les Etats-Unis d’Europe. The five best treatises were later offered to the eleventh meeting of the League of Nations as a booklet by Henry de Jouvenel, director of the “Revue”.148 Four years later, during the last meeting of the Commission d’Étude pour l’Union Européenne (a League of Nations commission) on 1 October 1937, the Romanian delegate Hélène Vacaresco, who was no unknown personality,149 stated the following according to the minutes of the meeting: (…) le Gouvernement roumain est très préoccupé de la question du chômage intellectuel. Il y a un esprit européen, celui auquel du reste se sont associés tous les continents, et c’est cet esprit qu’il s’agit de sauver. C’est pourquoi Mlle Vacaresco approuve l’idée d’inscrire la question du chômage des intellectuels dans l’ordre du jour des travaux de la Commission. [(…) the Romanian Government is very concerned about the issue of intellectual unemployment. There is a European spirit with which, moreover, all continents are associated, and it is this spirit that is to be saved. That is why Miss Vacaresco approves the idea of placing the question of unemployment of intellectuals on the agenda of the Commission’s work.] 150

Returning once more to the 1926 LIDH congress, two major issues still remained: colonialism and the legal situation of foreigners in postwar Europe. The colonial problem was analysed by the Portuguese delegate, Mr. Negreiros. He argued in favour of a humanist version of colonialism, and we will see later that the LIDH would not change its opinion on colonial matters over the years to come. Negreiros said:

146 See also Guieu, Le Comité fédéral, op. cit. 147 The Revue des Vivants was founded in 1927 and featured the subtitle “organe de la génération de la guerre”. Some issues have been digitized by the Bibliothèque Nationale at http://gallica. bnf.fr/ark:/12148/cb32858948g/date. 148 See information and document in: Forschungsinstitut der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Auswärtige Politik e.V., ed. (1962): Europa. Dokumente zur Frage der europäischen Einigung. Munich (Dokumente und Berichte, 17.1), part A2, p. 3–27 (German translation). 149 See http://www.lonsea.de/pub/person/1968. 150 Fonds Société des Nations, BDIC, 4 delta 1098. Commission d’Étude pour l’Union Européenne, Procès-Verbal de la Septième Session de la Commission (Geneva 1/10/1937), p. 4. Document number C.532.M.370. 1937.VII, Genève le 18 novembre 1937.

98

III. Human Rights Leagues and the Idea of Europe During the Interwar Period Notre devoir est, tout d’abord, de demander l’amplification de l’œuvre coloniale. Les peuples colonisateurs doivent avoir comme souci primordial le développement moral et matériel des peuples qui habitent d’énormes étendues de terre encore incultes. Il faut y apporter pacifiquement les moyens de fertiliser le sol et d’éclairer les cerveaux. [Our duty is, first of all, to demand the intensification of colonial work. The colonizing peoples must have as their primary concern the moral and material development of peoples who live in huge areas of uncultivated land. The means for fertilizing the soil and illuminating the brains must be provided peacefully.] 151

The few lines on colonialism were concluded as follows: M. Negreiros émet le vœu que les Etats européens organisent en commun la mise en valeur des colonies et la protection des indigènes, sous le contrôle de la Société des Nations. Ce vœu est adopté à l’unanimité. [M. Negreiros expresses the wish that the European states should organize jointly the development of the colonies and the protection of the natives, under the control of the League of Nations. This wish is adopted unanimously.] 152

The last point of debate was the legal status of foreigners. Mr. Triaca, the Italian delegate, proposed that foreigners staying in their host country for many years should be allowed to participate in the administration at least on a local level. Foreigners should also benefit from unrestricted liberty of movement. These propositions were vigorously rejected by Roger Picard. The final resolution embedded the USE in the League of Nations. No European country should be excluded from membership in the European federation, which was to encompass finance and customs policies (reports by Picard and Kuczynski) and promote exchange programs in the intellectual field (report by Wilmotte) and the valorization of colonies (report Negreiros). To start with, the congress approved a proposition made by Rudolf Goldscheid to establish an initial economic union between France, Germany and England – a concrete step of the kind rejected by other organizations promoting European union.153 The issues of emigration and the legal status of emigrants (report by Triaca) were to be studied in greater depth after the congress. Another resolution emphasized the struggle against fascism. The LIDH considered this its main objective, and the executive committee was charged with developing an action plan. The congress ended on Sunday, 27 June at 6 p.m. The ideas on an economic, financial, monetary and customs union of European countries that were floated during the 1926 congress are surprisingly close to what is thought about the matter today or has been realized in the meantime. The key differences are the integration of colonialism into the concept of the USE and the controversial debate on the limits of freedom of movement for European emigrants. The debate on the restriction of the freedom of movement for 151 Les Cahiers des Droits de l’Homme, Brussels congress, op. cit., p. 428. 152 Les Cahiers des Droits de l’Homme, Brussels congress, op. cit., p. 428. 153 The Comité fédéral de coopération européenne, which was established in 1928 but had a history even before then, pleaded in favour of a “grande Europe”. See Guieu, Le Comité fédéral, op. cit.

Human Rights Leagues and the Idea of a United States of Europe

99

non-European migrants (mostly refugees) closely resembled the debate we see today, however. National consciousness was strong and guided even the ligueurs. Their idea of democracy remained somewhat limited compared to present-day notions of the concept – though when taking into consideration the context of the interwar period, it was arguably as broad as could be imagined. *** In 1928, Victor Basch was invited to Berlin by the German league to comment, at a public conference, on the elections to the “Reichstag” on 20 May 1928. In his speech, he spoke about the elections in France and England as well, once again revealing himself as an optimistic Europeanist. He asked rhetorically why he had accepted the invitation to speak about the German elections although he was French: (…) c’est que je ne me sens pas un étranger parmi vous, c’est que je ne me sens pas étranger chez aucun peuple, c’est que je ne me sens, nulle part, étranger parmi des hommes. Un lien indissoluble unit aujourd’hui les nationaux de tous les pays. L’Europe toute entière, que dis-je ? L’Univers tout entier constitue, dès maintenant, sans que cette union soit encore officiellement reconnue ni organisée, un seul corps dont tous les membres sont solidaires, dont le sensorium perçoit tout ce qui blesse ou qui favorise l’un quelconque des membres. [(…) it is that I do not feel a stranger among you, it is that I do not feel a stranger among any people, it is that I do not feel, anywhere, a stranger among men. An indissoluble bond unites the nationals of all countries today. Europe as a whole, what do I say? The entire Universe constitutes, from now on, without this union being officially recognized or organized, a single body of which all members are in solidarity, whose sensorium perceives all that injures or supports any one of the members.]154

Elections in a European country, Basch thus argued, were of European and not only national significance. In December 1928, he would publish another article in the “Cahiers” on the subject of the “Malaise Européen” in which he sketched the present critical political situation, touching upon the topics of the League of Nations, disarmament, the threat to Europe from Italian fascism, the Austrian question (unification with Germany) and the German quest for a corridor through Poland to East Prussia, Hungary, Russian and American imperialism, and several others. As before, his suggested solution to these issues was the creation of a United States of Europe within the womb of the League of Nations – and he still maintained his optimism, pointing to the many initiatives promoting the idea.155 The French LDH chose “L’Organisation de la Paix” as the central topic for its annual congress in 1929. As usual, the “Cahiers” published a series of articles beforehand with the intent of enabling the LDH members to prepare properly for the congress – which was expected, as every year, to adopt a resolution. Issue No 5 (1929) of the “Cahiers” was largely dedicated to the subject, and within it,

154 Les Cahiers des Droits de l’Homme, 1928, No 16, 20 June, p. 363. 155 Les Cahiers des Droits de l’Homme, 1928, p. 761–763.

100

III. Human Rights Leagues and the Idea of Europe During the Interwar Period

Théodore Ruyssen156 wrote about “La sécurité et les Etats-Unis d’Europe”. He attacked the self-determined isolation of the USA harshly, stating that the appropriate reply to it could only be “l’unité européenne”. Necessary steps on the way to this European union would be a customs union, a diplomatic union and a military union.157 In the same year, Boris Mirkin-Getzevich emphasized the “Protection internationale des Droits de l’Homme”. It seems to have been an encouraging year overall, as he optimistically stated: “Il existe dans l’Europe nouvelle (…) une tendance à rechercher des solutions internationales pour des questions qui n’étaient autrefois soumises qu’a une règlementation nationale.” [There is a tendency in the new Europe (…) to seek international solutions for issues that were previously only subject to national regulation.]158 This idea of international as opposed to national solutions was developed further by the well-known historian Henri Sée, honorary member of the Comité Central of the LDH. In his article entitled “Réflexions sur La Fédération Européenne”, he claimed that the idea of a United States of Europe or a European Federation had become very common. European countries should transfer part of their national sovereignty to a European “Super-Etat”. Sée went on to review a book written by the Danish ophthalmologist Christian Frederik Heerfordt and entitled “New Europe” that had gained considerable appreciation in Europe. 159 Heerfordt resolutely posited a need for several integrative measures including the establishment of a European parliament and the opening of the federation for “European nations” outside of Europe. He envisaged a universal state – but the path to achieving this goal would be that of development. To adopt a European constitution on one day and form a European federation on the next would not work. Heerfordt maintained contact with the LDH. On 5 February 1931, he wrote to Henri Guernut to announce that he was staying in Paris for a mission. He told Guernut that he was the représentant d’une initiative scandinave en vue d’amener tous les peuples européens du monde a rechercher l’intérêt que présenterait pour eux l’institution prochaine des “ETATSUNIS DES NATIONS EUROPÉENNES” dans les cadres de la “SOCIÉTÉ DES NATIONS”. [representative of a Scandinavian initiative to bring all the peoples of Europe in the world to seek the interest that would be presented to them by the forthcoming institution of the “UNITED STATES OF THE EUROPEAN NATIONS” within the framework of the “LEAGUE OF NATIONS”.]160

156 157 158 159

For complementary information on Ruyssen, see http://www.lonsea.de/pub/person/771. Les Cahiers des Droits de l’Homme, 1929, p. 113–118. Les Cahiers des Droits de l’Homme, 1929, p. 243. Heerfordt, C. F. (1924, 1926): Et nyt Europa, 2 vols. in one book, Copenhagen. For a synthesis of the history of plans for Europe in Denmark, see Olden-Jørgensen, Sebastian (2004): Dänemark und Europa. Streiflichter zu diskursiven Kontinuitäten und Diskontinuitäten von 1600 bis 2000. In: Jahrbuch für Europäische Geschichte, vol. 5, p. 57–81, on Heerfordt, see p. 71–72. 160 BDIC, F delta res 798/54.

Human Rights Leagues and the Idea of a United States of Europe

101

On 5 September 1929, Aristide Briand spoke before the General Assembly of the League of Nations in Geneva, outlining a possible future European Union. He was asked to elaborate on his ideas in a “Memorandum”, which he eventually presented to the public on 1 May 1930.161 The echo of the memorandum in the media was considerable. Although Briand’s propositions were less concrete than many articles in the “Cahiers” and the countless pamphlets published in the interwar period by Europeanists full of hope for peace and European co-operation, one can nevertheless say that they were very much representative of the ongoing debate. The history of the public reaction to Briand’s memorandum is well-known162: Most countries published polite and diplomatic replies, but at the same time refused to undertake any of the concrete steps Briand and many other people would have hoped for. The memorandum also became a matter of debate for the human rights leagues, of course. Jules Prudhommeaux, whom we already know as an author published in the “Cahiers”, reported on it in September 1930. Prudhommeaux was also a member of the Comité Central of the LDH as well as – and this is quite noteworthy – the secretary general of the Fédération française des Associations pour la S.D.N. His article discussed the genesis and importance of the Briand project.163 In January 1931, Prudhommeaux followed up on his original report on the memorandum. He made use of the opportunity to ask several more fundamental questions, such as what Europe actually was. Did the notion of Europe include colonies? If so, should the colonies be “Europeanized”? And would doing so not be tantamount to “universalizing” Europe? He then examined the present state of the constitutions of various European countries and presented those countries’ replies to Briand’s memorandum. Finally, he informed his readers that the League of Nations had installed a Commission de l’Union Européenne.164 Paradoxically, this was to be the end of Briand’s project. The “Cahiers” continued to shed light on different aspects of the idea of European union. Théodore Ruyssen, member of the LDH’s Comité Central, asked whether an “international language” would be needed? He discussed various artificial languages that already had been invented, such as Esperanto, Ido and the like, but did not definitively answer the question posed in his title.165 The language issue would continue to be discussed for some time in the “Cahiers”, and 161 See for instance: Bariéty, Jacques, ed. (2007): Aristide Briand, la Société des Nations et l’Europe 1919–1932. Strasbourg. Elisha, Achille (2000): Aristide Briand. La paix mondiale et l’union européenne, 2nd ed. Louvain-la-Neuve. Oudin, Bernard (1987): Aristide Briand: la paix, une idée neuve en Europe. Paris. See also Hewitson, The United States of Europe, op. cit. 162 Auswärtiges Amt, ed. (1930): Schriftstücke zum Europa-Memorandum der Französischen Regierung. Berlin. 163 Les Cahiers des Droits de l’Homme, 1930, No 22, 10 September. 164 Les Cahiers des Droits de l’Homme, 1931, No 3, 30 January (Jules Prudhommeaux: La Fédération Européenne à Genève, p. 51–57). 165 Les Cahiers des Droits de l’Homme, 1931, No 9, 30 March.

102

III. Human Rights Leagues and the Idea of Europe During the Interwar Period

it also figured on the agenda of the League of Nations and several other organizations.166 In May 1931, the “Cahiers” published an article written by the sociologist Frederick Hertz. Hertz was an Austrian pacifist who first worked in Vienna and then, from 1930–1933, as professor at the University of Halle in Germany before being forced to emigrate. He chose a telling title for his article – “L’Accord Austro-Allemand et l’entente européenne” [The Austro-German Agreement and the European Entente] – but the text itself is somewhat disappointing, since Hertz did not truly approach the topic of an entente européenne. Only the title itself implicitly called for a debate on the relationship between Austria and Germany in the light of European understanding.167 The same is true for another article by Victor Basch entitled “Pour la Reconstruction de l’Europe. L’Accord FrancoAméricain”.168 It is interesting to see that the debate on European union in the LDH followed diplomatic events, most of which belonged to the category of bilateral diplomacy with European implications. In November 1931, Francis Delaisi (1873–1947), an avocat à la Cour d’Appel in Paris and member of the Comité Central of the LDH who would eventually end up being convicted as a collaborator on 6 April 1946, reported on various activities in support of European cooperation.169 He specifically cited the Comité Fédéral de Coopération Européenne – to which he had delivered a report in the same year170 – and its congress in Budapest in May 1931 as well as the Institut Economique Européen de Bruxelles, which had published concrete plans for the economic reconstruction of Europe.171 In January 1932, Jacques Kayser, a journalist, claimed that the Commission de l’Union Européenne of the League of Nations was dead. Despite this, he stated, the struggle for European Union had to continue. Kayser pinned his hopes on the Franco-German understanding172 – and indeed, the French and German human rights leagues committed themselves immensely to fostering this understanding.

166 For a list of organizations dealing with the problem of an international language, see http:// www.lonsea.de/pub/search_person?c=3. 167 Les Cahiers des Droits de l’Homme, 1931, No 14, 20 May. 168 Les Cahiers des Droits de l’Homme, 1931, No 19, 10 July. The accord was concluded on 6 July 1931. 169 See Stelandre, ed., L’idée européenne dans l’entre-deux-guerres, op. cit., p. 43. Delaisi published several books dealing with the issue of European cooperation, like Les Deux Europe, 1929 (Guieu, Le rameau et le glaive, op. cit., p. 171). On Delaisi, see Bussière, Éric; Dard, Olivier; Duchenne, Geneviève, eds. (2015): Francis Delaisi, du dreyfusisme à “l’Europe nouvelle”. Brussels; and Morin, Gilles (2015): Du CVIA au RPN. “Les tribulations d’un collaborationniste sincère”. In: Bussière/Dard/Duchenne, eds., Francis Delaisi, op. cit., p. 181–197; Bruneteau, Les “collabos”, op. cit., p. 343–351. 170 Guieu, Le Comité fédéral, op. cit. 171 Les Cahiers des Droits de l’Homme, 1932, No 28, 10 November. See also Delaisi, Francis (1931): Industries de guerre et industries de paix. Paris: Ligue des droits de l’homme, in-16, 32 pages (see list of booklets published by the LDH in BDIC F delta res 798/45). 172 Les Cahiers des Droits de l’Homme, 1932, No 1, 10 January.

Human Rights Leagues and the Idea of a United States of Europe

103

Naturally, the fundamental notion of a European Union was not dead. Although the “Cahiers” appear to have become less assiduous in regard to publishing articles dealing with the subject of European union or cooperation, or a United States of Europe, the debate went on: On 23 September 1932, the Danish entrepreneur Aage Heyman (1869–1960) from Copenhagen addressed to the LIDH a treatise on the subject of “The Problem of the World Crisis and the Absence of Concerted Action Between Nations”.173 Like many other idealists, he was a supporter of the vision of a United States of the World:174 Solely by the formation of THE UNITED STATES OF EUROPE (as a forerunner of THE UNITED STATES OF EUROPE AND AMERICA and later THE UNITED STATES OF THE WORLD), a body by means of which every single country will in advance be subject to every resolution passed by the Federal Parliament of the States, and in no other way, can there be any justified hope of bringing about any real improvement. 175

Heyman thought that the main obstacles were “customs barriers” and “last, but by no means least, [of] the still unsolved problem of war debts and reparations”.176 He asserted optimistically that these problems would “disappear of themselves through the formation of the The United States of Europe”177 and pursued his idea by combining economical aspects with the question of disarmament, as ligueurs also commonly did: What is more, the uniting of the countries in this manner will pave the way for common rules of taxation, social legislation, criminal and civil law (including legislation for trade, banking and note issuing), money, weights and measures. It will create the possibility of finding the best solution for the unemployment problem and the best guarantee against the outbreak of war. The enormous expenditure in all countries on competitive armaments will cease, and simultaneously that distrust and suspicion that is so inimical to the prosperity of the nations and a consequence of the nurturing of plans of revenge and the fear of such plans. 178

He proceeded to approach the problem of language, pleading for the use of one of the artificial languages (Esperanto or Ido) or, alternatively, French or English. He did not wish to abolish national consciousness, as this would not be necessary: “It is to altruism we must appeal when the road is to be cleared for the forming of the United States of Europe.”179 Both aspects were and are crucial, and they have been the weak point in all concepts for European unity: None of the nation states, neither in the early twentieth nor in the ongoing twenty-first century, were or are practicing altruism – respectively solidarity, which cannot work without the ideal of altruism. The same is true in regard to a lingua franca.

173 BDIC, F delta res 798/54. The Royal Danish Library in Copenhagen holds several imprints and handwritten letters (open access) by Heyman. Search for “Aage Heyman” in the OPAC. 174 All quotations of Heyman are from his treatise, which was part of his letter to the LIDH on 23 September 1932. 175 Ibid., p. 2. 176 Ibid., p. 2. 177 Ibid., p. 2. 178 Ibid., p. 2–3. 179 Ibid., p. 5–6.

104

III. Human Rights Leagues and the Idea of Europe During the Interwar Period

Next, Heyman scrutinized the activity of peace societies. He did not intend to criticize the ideal of peace itself, but pleaded for more effectiveness. The solution he proposed, namely the establishment of a new association or “Society”, was not particularly original: In all countries there are peace societies and leagues for the preservation of peace, which for years have worked and preached the cause of concord among nations. They have not been able to record real results, for the simple reason that real results will be unattainable without a United States of Europe. Nevertheless, their work has not been fruitless, their continued agitation having prepared the soil out of which the union of states is to grow. (…) All these bodies should now merge into a higher unity: “The Society for the Formation of the United States of Europe and America”, whose objective it would be to labour towards the goal indicated by the name.180

Otto Lehmann-Russbüldt (1873–1964), founding member of the Bund Neues Vaterland that would later become the German league, was an imperturbable Europeanist and ligueur. Among the LIDH papers, we find an essay by him that is undated but was probably written in the summer of 1933. It discusses the present situation of Europe. Lehmann-Russbüldt had published “Republik Europa”181 in 1925 and – indefatigable as he was – would eventually publish “Europa den Europäern” in 1948. His 1933 typescript comprising nine pages bears the title “Wo steht der Feind? Eine notwendige Analyse zur deutschen Aufrüstung. Von einem Europäer” [Where is the enemy? A necessary analysis of German armament. By a European].182 In it, he claims that the confrontation within Europe at the time was not one between trigger-happy countries on the one side and peaceful countries on the other side, but instead between “europäische Kriegspartei in allen Ländern gegen europäische Friedenspartei in allen Ländern” [European war party in all countries against European peace party in all countries].183 He sketches a very gloomy scenario – and, as we know today, his predictions were absolutely correct: Die vorläufige Prognose muss aber lauten: Neuer Zusammenstoß militärischer Kräfte. Beginn vor oder um die Wende von 1935. Effekt in jedem Falle für Europa dessen physischer Untergang und Verschwinden als Faktor in der Weltpolitik. Für Deutschland hätte diese Katastrophe die Bedeutung des dritten punischen Krieges. Kann der deutsche Nationalsozialismus sein jetziges Fiebertempo in der Aufrüstung noch etwa ein Jahr durchhalten, so hat er zwar den Trost, dass auch Deutschlands Umwelt in seinen Untergang mit hineingerissen ist, aber die noch übrig bleibenden Europäer müssten feststellen, dass Deutschland zwar wieder nicht gesiegt hat, trotzdem aber der Sieger über das von ihm mit der Kraft des Wahnsinnigen

180 Ibid., p. 6–7. 181 Lehmann-Russbüldt, Otto (1925): Republik Europa. Berlin-Hessenwinkel: Verlag der Neuen Gesellschaft, 30 pages. Lehmann-Russbüldt had been discussing a United States of Europe since 1910, see Innerhofer, Roland (1996): Deutsche Science Fiction 1870–1914. Rekonstruktion und Analyse der Anfänge einer Gattung. Vienna, p. 165. I am grateful to Christopher Treiblmayr for this information. 182 Otto Lehmann-Russbüldt, Wo steht der Feind? Eine notwendige Analyse zur deutschen Aufrüstung. Von einem Europäer, typescript, 9 pages (ca. 1933): BDIC, F delta res 798/55. 183 Ibid., p. 4. Emphasis by Lehmann-Russbüldt.

Human Rights Leagues and the Idea of a United States of Europe

105

gehasste Neue Europa geworden ist. Denn ein Neues Europa kann nicht mehr für diese geschichtliche Epoche erstehen, weil überhaupt nichts mehr da ist. [The provisional forecast must be: New collision of military forces. Beginning before or around the turn of 1935. Effect in any case for Europe: its physical demise and disappearance as a factor in world politics. For Germany this catastrophe would have the significance of the Third Punic War. If German National Socialism can maintain its present feverish pace of armament for a year or so, it will find comfort in that Germany’s environment will be plunged into ruin alongside it, while the remaining Europeans would have to realize that Germany did not win again, but nevertheless has become the winner over the New Europe hated by it with the intensity of a madman. For a New Europe can no longer arise for this historical epoch, because there is nothing left.] 184

Lehmann-Russbüldt deplored the fact that the danger represented by Hitler was not taken seriously in Europe. He concluded his essay with this sentence: “Ein zukünftiger Historiker wird garnicht sentimental oder erschüttert, wohl aber ganz trocken bemerken können: ‘Europa hatte sein Schicksal verdient’.” [A future historian will be able to remark in no way sentimentally or appalled, but quite dryly: “Europe deserved its fate.”]185 Continuing with the LIDH papers, we find what may be described as an ultimate effort to promote the project of a European union by way of a FrancoGerman union in 1939. French and German ligueurs had invested a lot of time into promoting Franco-German reconciliation. Postwar history after 1945 has proven that this reconciliation was a conditio sine qua non for European integration. Lehmann-Russbüldt’s gloomy prognosis cited above would turn out to be shockingly pertinent, as would an analysis provided by the Union FrancoAllemande in a document186 signed by politicians and persons belonging to the intellectual elite. On the German side, we find among many others the names of Alfred Döblin, Fritz von Unruh, Emil Ludwig, Franz Werfel, Annette Kolb, Oscar Maria Graf, Walter Mehring and Max Beer. On the French side, the initiative was signed by persons belonging to the political sphere: Léo Lagrange, député du Nord, ancien Ministre; Yvon Delbos, député de la Dordogne, ancien Ministre des Affaires Etrangères; Mme Germaine Kellerson; Joseph Paul-Boncour, sénateur du Loir et Cher, ancien Président du Conseil, ancien Ministre des Affaires Etrangères. Other signees included Msgr. Beaupin, Directeur du Comité Catholique des Amitiés Françaises à l’Etranger and Emmanuel Mounier, Directeur de “L’Esprit”. The aim of this Franco-German Union is stated as follows: L’Union Franco-Allemande s’inspire de cette conviction que le sort de l’Europe et du monde entier dépend largement des relations entre les deux peuples de France et d’Allemagne. Le but de l’Union est donc de se mettre au service, par tous les moyens appropriés, du rapprochement et de la collaboration entre les vrais représentants du monde intellectuel et politique des deux pays. L’Union Franco-Allemande s’inspire d’autre part de la conviction que ce 184 Ibid., p. 9. 185 Ibid., p. 9. 186 BDIC, F delta res 798/56, letter and attached document, 13 May 1939.

106

III. Human Rights Leagues and the Idea of Europe During the Interwar Period rapprochement ne peut s’effectuer que sur la base commune de la civilisation humaniste de l’Occident, sur l’estime mutuelle des peuples, et sur le respect absolu des libertés et des droits de l’homme. (…) L’organe officiel de l’Union est la tribune européenne hebdomadaire “L’Avenir” (“Die Zukunft”).187 (…) Ils (les membres ; W.S.) sont persuadés que la cause de la démocratie, de la dignité humaine et des droits de l’homme l’emporterait dans l’épreuve suprême. (…) Enfin, les membres de l’Union Franco-Allemande sont persuadés que les relations futures de la France et de l’Allemagne dépendront du succès des efforts faits pour l’organisation européenne préconisée par les hommes politiques, les plus larges d’esprit de notre temps. (…) Au cas où la guerre serait inévitable, l’Union Franco-Allemande continuera à lutter pour l’organisation d’une Union Européenne, Fédération des Etats de l’Europe, complétée d’une union douanière et monétaire, et pour l’organisation d’une force réelle et supranationale au service de la défense démocratique. [The Franco-German Union is inspired by the conviction that the fate of Europe and the entire world depends largely on the relations between the two peoples of France and Germany. The aim of the Union is thus to serve, by all appropriate means, the rapprochement and collaboration between the true representatives of the intellectual and political world of the two countries. On the other hand, the Franco-German Union is inspired by the conviction that this rapprochement can only take place on the common basis of the humanist civilization of the West, the mutual esteem between the peoples, and the absolute respect for freedom and human rights. (…) The official organ of the Union is the weekly European platform “The Future” (“Die Zukunft”). (…) They (the members; W.S.) are convinced that the cause of democracy, human dignity and human rights will prevail in the supreme test. (…) Finally, the members of the Franco-German Union are convinced that the future relations of France and Germany will depend on the success of the efforts made for the European organisation advocated by the politicians endowed with the greatest spirit of our time in Europe. (…) In case the war is inevitable, the Franco-German Union will continue to fight for the organisation of a European Union, Federation of European States, completed by a customs and monetary union, and for the organization of a real and supranational force in the service of democratic defence.]

Chronologically speaking, this initiative concludes the series of documents beginning in 1920, the first year of the “Cahiers”, which dealt from their very beginning with the idea of Europe with a view to a United States of Europe or a European Union. The idea was an economic, political and pacifist one, and it was based on the values of democracy and human rights. But various subtexts existed as well, and we will take a closer look at them now. THE CONCEPT OF CIVILIZATION, COLONIALISM AND EUROPE – CONCLUSION As we have seen above, the notion of a United States of the World was topical during the interwar period, and ligueurs believed in the League of Nations as long as it existed – even though they repeatedly criticized it as well. It therefore should 187 On this periodical, see the corresponding research project conducted by the Institut für soziale Bewegungen, Ruhr-Universität Bochum (Germany) and Maison des sciences de l’homme, Dijon (France): http://isb.rub.de/forschung/drittmittel/zukunft.html.de. Brief project description: http://isb.rub.de/mam/images/drittmittel/texte_francais.pdf (accessed 24 February 2019).

The Concept of Civilization, Colonialism and Europe – Conclusion

107

come as no surprise that the perspective of humankind as a whole was crucial. Kurt Grossmann of the German league, who had emigrated to Prague, wrote to Victor Basch in German on 16 February 1934 regarding the ongoing events in Austria. He called for an international commission to examine the bloody confrontation in Vienna and the failure of the judicial system, arguing as follows: Die furchtbaren, unvergleichlichen Geschehnisse in Oesterreich zwingen die Kulturmenschheit, Stellung zu nehmen. (…) Unerträglich wäre es für das Weltgewissen, wenn die Sieger die Besiegten als Schuldige deklarieren dürften, wo die Frage Schuld oder Nichtschuld noch in keiner Weise gelöst ist. Die mit allen mittelalterlichen Begleiterscheinungen durchgeführten Prozessverfahren zwingen mit aller Dringlichkeit, dass ein Ausschuss von Persönlichkeiten internationaler Geltung zusammentritt (…). [The terrible, unmatched events in Austria compel civilized human beings to take a stand. (…) It would be unbearable for the world conscience if the victors were allowed to declare the defeated guilty, where the question of guilt or innocence is not yet resolved in any way. The litigation procedures carried out with all the medieval connotations, demand with urgency that a committee of personalities of international standing be convened (…).]188

Grossmann repeated the word “Weltgewissen” (world conscience), used as a synonym for an international commission, several times throughout his letter: Gerade die internationale Situation Oesterreichs gibt der Weltöffentlichkeit die Möglichkeit, durch einen Druck auf die Völkerbundsregierungen ihre Stimme mit grösserer Wirksamkeit als in anderen Fällen zu erheben. Sie m u s s es tun, wenn nicht das Wort vom Weltgewissen und der Gedanke einer europäischen Kulturgemeinschaft in schwerer und für alle Völker eines Tages verhängnisvoller Weise Lügen gestraft werden sollen. [It is precisely the international situation of Austria that gives the world public the possibility of raising its voice with greater effectiveness than in other cases by exerting pressure on the governments of the League of Nations. It m u s t do so if the term “world conscience” and the idea of a European cultural community are not to be belied gravely and in a way that will one day be fatal for all peoples.]189

Considering his use of the terms “world conscience”, “world public”, “civilized humankind” and “European communion of civilization”, there is no obvious distinction made in Grossmann’s letter between the global and the European. The LIDH used similar language to describe the dangerous situation in Europe. In 1936, it held its international congress in Luxemburg, and the following leagues sent delegates: Belgium, Czechoslovakia, France, Germany, Italy, Luxemburg, Poland, Russia, Spain and Switzerland. The National Council for Civil Liberties (London) was also represented by one delegate.190 The following resolution was formulated: La Fédération Internationale des Ligues des Droits de l’Homme dénonce à la conscience universelle les périls de cette situation tragique, qui rappelle les temps crépusculaires de Moyen Age. (…) La Fédération des Ligues espère que les peuples opprimés, encouragés par 188 Kurt Grossmann, Letter with attachment to Victor Basch, 16 February 1934, typescript, original plus carbon copy, p. 1 of attachment: BDIC, F delta res 798/54. Emphasis by Grossmann. 189 Ibid. Emphasis by Grossmann. 190 BDIC, F delta res 798/54.

108

III. Human Rights Leagues and the Idea of Europe During the Interwar Period ces événements tels que la seconde révolution espagnole, qui devraient leur servir d’exemple, assurés de la sympathie et de la solidarité internationales, mettront leurs oppresseurs hors d’état de nuire, retrouveront tous enfin leur place dans la grande famille humaine, et joindront leurs efforts aux efforts des peuples civilisés, qui depuis longtemps les attendent, afin de reprendre tous ensemble la marche vers les hautes cimes où luit l’idéal de la liberté, de la justice sociale et de la paix universelle. [The International Federation of Human Rights Leagues denounces to the universal conscience the perils of this tragic situation, which recalls the twilight times of the Middle Ages. (…) The Federation of Leagues hopes that the oppressed peoples, encouraged by events such as the second Spanish Revolution, which should serve as an example to them, assured of international sympathy and solidarity, will put their oppressors out of state. All will finally find their place in the great human family and join their efforts with the efforts of the civilized peoples who have long been waiting for them, to resume together the march to the high peaks where the ideal of freedom, social justice and universal peace shines.] 191

As mentioned before, the human rights leagues and their members were very much “children of their times”. This is to say that in terms of the idea of Europe, they were full of confidence in the colonial and imperial concept of Europe.192 The description of the 1926 congress in Brussels provided above offered an initial insight into what to expect in this regard. Count Coudenhove-Kalergi’s book “Pan-Europa” may serve as a representative example for the belief in the concept of imperial Europe. CoudenhoveKalergi illustrated his book with a map showing African and Asian colonies being part of “Pan-Europe”. I will not analyse his interpretation of “Pan-Europe” or the corresponding map in detail – the point here is simply that the latter illustrated what a lot of intellectuals thought Europe to be. In the first year (1920) and the first issue of the “Cahiers”, Victor Basch discussed the problem of the former German colonies in Africa, arguing that the only correct procedure would have been to mandate the League of Nations, which in turn would have entrusted a country with the administration of these colonies. His argument was as follows: “Et la sagesse eût voulu que cette puissance fût l’Allemagne. Au trop-plein de sa population, il faut de toute nécessité une issue.” [And wisdom would have wanted this power to be Germany. For the overflow of its population, it is necessary to have an exit.]193 Such demographic arguments were used regularly in the discussions on colonialism, and the above statement also clearly shows that colonialism and colonization were not called into question in the least. This conformed to the “philosophy” of the League of Nations. The debate on the former German colonies continued in 1925, when the Comité Central of the LDH discussed a report written by Dr. Hohenstein of the German league. Hohenstein argued that the German Reich had administrated its 191 BDIC, F delta res 798/54 (LIDH), printed document from LIDH congress in Luxemburg, 14– 16 March 1936. 192 With regard to the LDH, Naquet, Pour l’humanité, op. cit. studies this question in detail. See also Liauzu, Claude (2004): La Ligue des droits de l’homme et la colonisation. In: Manceron/Rebérioux, eds., Droits de l’homme, op. cit., p. 142–159. 193 Basch, Victor (1920): La paix en péril. In: Les Cahiers des Droits de l’Homme, No 1, 5 January, p. 5.

The Concept of Civilization, Colonialism and Europe – Conclusion

109

colonies well and that they should therefore return to Germany. Basch supported this point of view and pointed out that as a colonial power, Germany had behaved the same as any other. The seizure of the colonies was, he said, a sanction imposed by the victorious power on the vanquished power. Guernut and Paul Langevin194 agreed with Basch’s interpretation but doubted whether it was a matter in which the LDH could intervene. The general legitimacy of actually having colonies seems to have been beyond doubt, however.195 The “Colonies allemandes” remained on the agenda of the Comité Central throughout April 1925, and issue No 9 of the “Cahiers” on 25 April 1925 included eight pages on the issue of Germany. According to Basch, however, Langevin now introduced the topic somewhat surprisingly given his earlier statements: “(…) la Ligue reconnaît aux peuples le droit de disposer d’eux-mêmes et [qu’]elle est, en principe, opposée à la colonisation.” [(…) the League recognizes the right of peoples to self-determination and is, in principle, opposed to colonization.] The contradiction was likewise pointed out by Mr. Delmont: “(…) il y a contradiction à affirmer le droit des peuples à disposer d’eux-mêmes et à affirmer d’autre part le principe de la colonisation.” [(…) there is a contradiction in affirming the right of peoples to self-determination and affirming on the other hand the principle of colonization.] He recommended not mentioning the right of peoples to selfdetermination. Henri Guernut explained what he called “notre doctrine coloniale”: Ce qui inspire notre doctrine coloniale, ce n’est pas le souci du droit des peuples, c’est le souci de la paix. Et c’est pour éviter les conflits entre nations colonisatrices que la Ligue a toujours réclamé la colonisation en commun, ou mieux, la colonisation par la Société des Nations, déléguant des mandats et en contrôlant l’usage. [What inspires our colonial doctrine is not the concern for the rights of peoples, it is the concern for peace. And it is to avoid conflicts between colonizing nations that the League has always demanded joint colonization, or better, colonization by the League of Nations, delegating mandates and controlling usage.] 196

As mentioned before, the LDH had installed a Commission d’études coloniales (or Commission coloniale) in 1921. Its president in 1925, Ferdinand Buisson197 explained its objective: “défense des droits de la personne humaine; droits des habitants indigènes; droits des colons ou fonctionnaires Français; droits des étrangers qui résident dans nos Colonies” [defence of human rights; rights of indigenous inhabitants; rights of colonists or French officials; rights of foreigners residing in our colonies].198 And indeed, the commission attacked the French government for following very contrary principles. Let us look at the example of Algeria199: In its meeting 194 195 196 197 198 199

See also http://www.lonsea.de/pub/person/7267. Les Cahiers des Droits de l’Homme, 1925, No 8, 10 April, p. 184. All quotations from: Les Cahiers des Droits de l’Homme, 1925, No 9, 25 April, p. 210. See also http://www.lonsea.de/pub/person/3380. Les Cahiers des Droits de l’Homme, 1921, No 4, 25 February, p. 90. See Agrikoliansky, Éric (2004): La guerre d’Algérie: Une “nouvelle affaire Dreyfus”? In: Manceron/Rebérioux, eds., Droits de l’homme, op. cit., p. 218–231.

110

III. Human Rights Leagues and the Idea of Europe During the Interwar Period

on 16 November 1927, the Commission coloniale criticized the instrument of “mise en surveillance” of indigenous people as applied by the governor. The minutes of the meeting clearly show that the commission considered the governor’s behaviour illegal: Pour M. Ernest Lafont la “mise en surveillance” est une peine sinon administrative mais disciplinaire, analogue au “domicilio coatto” de Mussolini. Elle vise directement la liberté de l’individu. (…) M. Lafont trouve choquant qu’il existe, pour une certaine catégorie de “Français inférieurs” des peines dans le cas où il n’y a pas de délit. [To Mr. Ernest Lafont, the “placing under surveillance” is a punishment not administrative but disciplinary, analogous to the “domicilio coatto” of Mussolini. It is aimed directly at the freedom of the individual. (…) Mr. Lafont finds it shocking that there are punishments for a certain category of “inferior Frenchmen” in the case where there is no offense.] 200

In addition to legal arguments, the commission also posited a historical argument showing once again that its members worked off the basis of an exclusively Franco(-European) concept of civilization: “Considérant qu’après 98 années de collaboration franco-algérienne, les indigènes d’Algérie, très suffisamment évolués, peuvent et doivent prétendre au bénéfice du régime pénal de droit commun (…).” [Considering that after 98 years of Franco-Algerian collaboration, the natives of Algeria, very sufficiently advanced, can and must claim the benefit of the common criminal law (…).]201 One feels compelled to ask whether the ligueurs – despite their good intentions to realize human rights for all men and women in the colonies – were genuinely aware of the intellectual developments of the epoch they lived in. On 19 November 1926, Joseph Gothon-Lunion, secretary general of the Comité de défense de la race nègre (Paris) wrote the following to Henri Guernut in a request for financial aid: Nos aîeux ont été arrachés avec violence du sol africain et vendus sur le marché mondial. Ils ont contribué à bâtir l’Europe et l’Asie Mineure. Ils ont bâti les Amériques et leurs Isles. Nous ne demandons pas l’aumône. Nous réclamons notre part dans le patrimoine universel. [Our elders were violently torn from African soil and sold on the world market. They helped to build Europe and Asia Minor. They built the Americas and their isles. We do not ask alms. We demand our share in the universal heritage.] 202

This was definitely not the position of the ligueurs or other civic activists. Whatever the exact significance of “patrimoine” was, it must be clearly stated that league members always implicitly or explicitly believed that cultural development was furthered by Europeans – and this fact is visible in many of the statements quoted in this chapter. *** 200 BDIC, F delta res 798/9, minutes of the meeting of the Commission d’études coloniales, 16 November 1927, p. 2–3 (typescript, carbon copy). Emphasis as in the minutes. 201 Ibid., p. 4. The wording is by Raoul Mary, member of the commission. 202 BDIC, F delta res 798/65.

The Concept of Civilization, Colonialism and Europe – Conclusion

111

Although critical opinions on colonialism were not entirely absent from the debate, the geographical, political and cultural concept of Europe was never restricted to the continent itself. Considering the many European emigrants to South American countries such as Argentina, Brazil and Paraguay, to Central American countries such as Mexico, and to the USA and Canada, the implicitness of the notion of staying in these countries was unequivocal. In general, the Americas did not constitute a culturally distant world – or, as Mr. Fabra Ribas203 of the Portuguese league put it during the first LIDH congress in Paris in 1922: “Nous nous chargerons particulièrement de nouer des liens entre l’Amérique latine et la Ligue. L’axe de la civilisation moderne se déplace vers l’Amérique.” [We concern ourselves in particular with building links between Latin America and the League. The axis of modern civilization is moving towards America.]204 It was mostly the LDH that dealt with the establishment of new leagues, or new chapters of the French league itself, in other countries. In the meeting of the Comité Central on 2 January 1923, it was reported that a league was apparently going to be established in Mexico and that Emir Emin Arslan205 wished to create a league in his206 country as soon as he had returned there. Secretary general Aline Ménard-Dorian of the LIDH was in contact with Belgian ligueurs who were trying to revitalise the Belgian league.207 During the meeting of the International League in Paris on 5 March 1924, Ménard-Dorian said that 208 American intellectuals had signed a letter confirming their intent to create an American League of Human Rights.208 Victor Basch, one of the leading figures in the LDH and LIDH, wrote a letter from Chile that was published in the “Cahiers” in November 1925 and in which he expressed optimism regarding the successful establishment of the first LDH chapter in South America.209 With the exception of the French-dominated Maghreb, African colonies did not have the same attraction as the Americas, though they were likewise considered part of Europe. The Maghreb under French “protection”210 was culturally different from other African colonies: It was to some degree culturally “French” and, to a lesser extent, also “Spanish”. Albert Camus tellingly exhibited this cultural métissage (in Algeria) in his “Le premier homme”.211 For legal reasons, the Maghreb could not figure as prominently as American countries among the targets of European political emigration – with the exception 203 See also http://www.lonsea.de/pub/person/13280. 204 Les Cahiers des Droits de l’Homme, 1922, p. 303. 205 On Emin Arslan see Tornielli, Pablo (2015): Hombre de tres mundos. Para una biografía política e intelectual del emir Emín Arslán. In: Dirāsāt Hispānicas: Revista Tunecina de Estudios Hispánicos, No 2, p. 157–181, https://dirasathispanicas.org/index.php/dirasathispanicas/ article/view/35/html. 206 It is said “Syria” but Arslan was from Lebanon. 207 Les Cahiers des Droits de l’Homme, 1923, No 4, 25 February. 208 Les Cahiers des Droits de l’Homme, 1924, p. 210. 209 Les Cahiers des Droits de l’Homme, 1925, No 23, 10 November, p. 539. 210 The legal statute of Algeria, Tunisia and Morocco differed one from the other. 211 Camus, Albert (1994): Le premier homme [ca. 1959]. Paris (unfinished manuscript).

112

III. Human Rights Leagues and the Idea of Europe During the Interwar Period

of French natives. The Italian league in French exile attempted to establish a chapter in Tunis, but ran into significant difficulties with the French Résident (effectively the French plenipotentiary).212 Charles de Gaulle’s France libre would later benefit from the Maghreb being French – and having remained out of reach of the Pétain regime. Over the course of time, the LDH founded several dozen LDH chapters in French colonies and protectorates. In 1924, the “Cahiers” published a list of regions in which one or more such chapters had been established: Congo, Dahomey, Gabon, Guyana, French India, Ile de la Réunion, Indochina213, Madagascar, Morocco, Martinique, Océane, Sénégal, Côte des Somalis (Djibouti), Chad, Togo and Tunisia.214 Returning from a voyage to Morocco, Henri Guernut told the LDH in 1924 that most of the French living in Morocco were obviously also members of LDH chapters. He concluded: En sorte qu’on peut dire que la France au Maroc, c’est surtout la Ligue. Et comme la Ligue c’est la conscience même de la démocratie, nous avons la certitude que, grâce à vous, grâce à vos efforts en face de la Résidence et en face des indigènes, la France au Maroc va montrer sa vraie figure, qui est une figure démocratique (…). [So that we can say that France in Morocco, it is predominantly the League. And as the League is the very conscience of democracy, we are certain that, thanks to you, thanks to your efforts vis-à-vis the Résidence and vis-à-vis the natives, France in Morocco will show its true form, which is a democratic form (…).]215

All this mirrors the contemporary concept of civilization, which was heavily imbued with French civilizational notions: The historical model of French civilization continued to prepossess Europe. We have seen above that the French “Déclaration des droits de l’homme et du citoyen” was unequivocally recognized as the founding document for all human rights leagues federated within the LIDH, and until the end of 1939 – with the exception of Switzerland and Sweden – France was the country of choice for thousands of emigrants. What is more, the circumstances of the creation of the French League for Human Rights became part of the master narrative. As Otto Lehmann-Russbüldt stated on the occasion of a meeting between the Comité Central of the LDH and the German league Bund Neues Vaterland in Paris on 3 January 1922:

212 See BDIC, F delta res 0798/59, quarrels with the Résident in regard to the statutes of the Italian league and its conformity with the laws in the Tunisian protectorate. 213 In regard to Indochina, see Hémery, Daniel (2001): L’Indochine, les droits humains entre colonisateurs et colonisés, la ligue des Droits de l’Homme (1898–1954). In: Outre-mers, vol 88, No 330–331: Outre-mers économiques: de l’Histoire à l’actualité du XXI e siècle, p. 223–239, DOI: 10.3406/outre.2001.3850. 214 Les Cahiers des Droits de l’Homme, 1924, p. 462. 215 Les Cahiers des Droits de l’Homme, 1924, p. 231.

The Concept of Civilization, Colonialism and Europe – Conclusion

113

Nous nous sommes rencontrés ici pour faire à l’égard de l’Europe ce que Zola a fait pour la France quand il a clamé son “J’accuse”. Nous voulons préparer, commencer la révolution spirituelle de l’Europe, afin que les droits de l’homme soient non seulement proclamés, mais encore appliqués partout. [We meet here to do what Zola did for France when he proclaimed his “J’accuse”. We wish to prepare, to begin the spiritual revolution of Europe, so that human rights are not only proclaimed, but applied everywhere.]216

Late eighteenth- and early nineteenth-century historiography solidified the concept of a Western or occidental civilization, the core of which was considered French. The best example illustrating this master narrative is François Guizot’s “History of Civilization in Europe” (1828)217, and many voices belonging to human rights league members provide evidence of its enduring binding character. It seems to me that the concept behind a great many statements quoted so far – that is to say their subtext – is along the lines of “civilization is a European thing that has a global vocation”. It also seems to be generally implied that “the core of civilization is French civilization”. Théodore Ruyssen wrote the following in the “Cahiers” in 1925 on the subject of colonization and law:218 Ce n’est pas dans les Cahiers des Droits de l’Homme qu’il se trouvera personne pour contester la maxime que les peuples ont le droit de disposer d’eux-mêmes, extension naturelle du droit de l’individu à disposer de sa personne physique et morale. [It is not in the Cahiers des Droits de l’Homme that there will be anyone to challenge the maxim that peoples have the right to self-determination, a natural extension of the right of the individual to dispose of his natural and legal person.]

With this being said, he immediately went on to justify the act of colonization: Aujourd’hui (…) nous avons de l’humanité une notion claire et exactement circonscrite. Nous connaissons avec la figure de la planète toute la variété des races de la famille humaine. Bien plus, il existe en fait de nos jours une vie commune de l’humanité, une culture humaine, une sociabilité humaine, et c’est par rapport à cette unité humaine que l’indépendance des peuples acquiert un sens précis, de même que la liberté de l’individu n’a sa pleine signification que dans la cité. [Today (…) we have a clear and precisely circumscribed notion of humanity. We know with the appearance of the planet all the variety of the races of the human family. Moreover, today there is in fact a common life of humanity, a human culture, a human sociability, and it is in relation to this human unity that the independence of peoples acquires a precise meaning, just as the liberty of the individual has its full meaning only in the cité.]

He disapproved of the use of violence in colonization, stating that there was an appropriate way of colonizing:

216 Les Cahiers des Droits de l’Homme, 1922, p. 112. 217 Guizot, François Pierre Guillaume (1828): Cours d’histoire moderne. Histoire générale de la civilisation en Europe. Paris. English translation: Guizot, François; Hazlitt, William, transl.; Siedentop, Larry, ed. (1997): The History of Civilization in Europe. London – New York. 218 All quotations from Ruyssen, Théodore (1925): La colonisation et le droit. In: Les Cahiers des Droits de l’Homme, No 21, 15 October, p. 489–491.

114

III. Human Rights Leagues and the Idea of Europe During the Interwar Period Pour conclure, il y a, à côté de méthodes condamnables et condamnées, une colonisation humaine, bienveillante, intelligente, qui sait concilier les intérêts des indigènes avec ceux des occupants. [In conclusion, there is, beside condemnable and condemned methods, a humane colonization, benevolent, intelligent, which knows how to reconcile the interests of the natives with those of the occupants.]

To prove himself right, he put forth a historical argument: Et, par-dessus ce fait d’expérience, il y a cette vérité de bon sens, vieille comme le monde, que notre civilisation même est en grande partie le fruit de la colonisation. Supprimez de l’histoire les grands peuples colonisateurs, Carthaginois, Grecs et Romains dans l’antiquité, Génois et Vénitiens au moyen-âge, Espagnols, Portugais, Anglais, Hollandais et Français dans les temps modernes, la figure du monde actuel en serait prodigieusement changée. [And, on top of this experience, there is this common-sense truth, as old as the world, that our very civilization is largely the fruit of colonization. Remove from history the great colonizing peoples, the Carthaginians, Greeks and Romans in antiquity, the Genoese and Venetians in the Middle Ages, the Spanish, Portuguese, English, Dutch and French in modern times, [and] the current appearance of the world would be changed remarkably.]

Ruyssen’s reasoning culminated in a rhetorical question: Serait-elle (la figure du monde ; W.S.) pire, serait-elle meilleure ? Une humanité sans colonisation jouirait-elle des délices de l’âge d’or, ou végéterait-elle dans la barbarie ? [Would it (the appearance of the world; W.S.) be worse, would it be better? Would a humanity without colonization enjoy the benefits of the golden age, or would it vegetate in barbarism?]

This represents a period-typical construction of arguments conjoining the notion of civilization with a justification of colonization. One cannot deny the fact that this strong concept of civilization also clearly implied the expected way of becoming part of it: The key was education, and following the path of education meant to develop. Indigenous peoples could follow this path, and the European ligueurs would then recognize them as civilized peoples guided by an indigenous elite. Some civilizational gaps existed within Europe as well, and here too, the key to attaining the highest level of civilization – as represented in particular by France – was education and development. In this context, I will once again quote the anonymous “groupe d’Albanais”, who seemed to have completely internalized this concept. Their letter written in late October 1939 referred to the occupation of Albania by fascist Italy. Albania had come under Italian rule in the form of a personal union of the Italian monarch on 16 April 1939. The Italian propaganda praised the alleged advantages for Albania, and the authors of the letter summarized the main thrusts of this propaganda, which was echoed by non-Italian media, as follows: Le but, en somme, est de transformer le pays le plus stagnant, le plus impénétrable à la civilisation mécanique moderne, sans routes, sans chemins de fer, sans hôtels et presque sans essence, en un pays doté d’une structure moderne.

The Concept of Civilization, Colonialism and Europe – Conclusion

115

[The goal, in short, is to transform the most stagnant country, the most impenetrable to modern mechanical civilization, without roads, without railroads, without hotels and almost without essence, into a country outfitted with a modern structure.] 219

It was this aspect of presumed civilizational backwardness that was subsequently criticized by the authors: Ainsi donc, après avoir soumis la nation albanaise par la force des armes et l’avoir réduite au silence, les agents du Duce s’efforcent maintenant de la discréditer aux yeux du monde civilisé en usant envers elle de procédés indigne d’un grand peuple héritier d’une culture millénaire. [Thus, after having subjugated the Albanian nation by force of arms and having reduced it to silence, the agents of the Duce now attempt to discredit it in the eyes of the civilized world by using against it processes unworthy of a great people, heir to a thousand-year-old culture.]

They went on to elucidate their historic culture: Les Albanais ont peut-être tous les défauts mais assurément pas celui d’être impénétrables à toute civilisation moderne. Au contraire, la plupart des étrangers qui ont étudié notre pays à des titres divers ont reconnu que, parmi tous les peuples arriérés, les Albanais étaient un des plus aisément civilisables. (…) A lire la conclusion de ce rapport (by a French journalist in Rome ; W.S.) on se croyait être en présence d’une peuplade de sauvages des profondeurs de l’Afrique. Or c’est là une façon malveillante et mensongère de représenter ce peuple antique et fier, digne d’un jugement plus équitable. [The Albanians may have all these faults, but certainly not that of being impenetrable to any modern civilization. On the contrary, most foreigners who have studied our country in various ways have recognized that among all the backward peoples, Albanians were one of the most easily civilized. (…) Reading the conclusion of this report (by a French journalist in Rome; W.S.), we thought we were in the presence of a tribe of savages from the depths of Africa. But it is a malicious and deceptive way to represent this ancient and proud people worthy of a more equitable judgment.] 220

Albania, the authors stated, had made considerable progress since it had become independent (officially in 1913). As already quoted above in a different context, they wrote: Aussitôt que la stabilité politique à l’intérieur fut acquise, les dirigeants du peuple albanais se rendirent compte que pour doter le pays d’une structure moderne il fallait avant tout le pourvoir d’une élite intellectuelle formée aux disciplines de la culture occidentale. L’Etat, l’industrie, l’agriculture, en un mot tous les domaines de l’économie nationale et de la vie publique avaient besoin, pour être bien dirigés, de techniciens et de spécialistes sortis de quelque université des grands pays civilisés. [As soon as internal political stability was achieved, the leaders of the Albanian people realized that in order to endow the country with a modern structure, it was necessary above all to provide it with an intellectual elite trained in the disciplines of Western culture. The state, industry, agriculture, in a word all fields of the national economy and public life, in order to

219 BDIC, F delta res 0798/58, portfolio Albanian league. Letter by “un groupe d’Albanais” to Émile Kahn, 20 October 1939, 17 pages, typescript (p. 1 and 17 original, p. 2–16 carbon copy). 220 Ibid., p. 10–11.

116

III. Human Rights Leagues and the Idea of Europe During the Interwar Period be well-directed, needed technicians and specialists from some university of the great civilized countries.]221

They attributed particular significance to the Lycée français: L’ambition de transformer l’Albanie en un pays civilisé où les beautés de la nature s’allieraient harmonieusement avec les réalisations du génie humain, était devenu une vraie mystique pour la jeunesse. [The ambition to transform Albania into a civilized country where the beauties of nature were harmoniously aligned with the achievements of human genius, had become a true mystique for the youth.]222

*** A final aspect I wish to examine is what has been called “Zivilisationsbruch” (breach of civilization) in German. The years this chapter deals with were still a while before the Holocaust, and I was not able to find any clues indicating that people could imagine what was to come. Nevertheless, the feeling that not just National Socialism in particular, but fascism in general was a concept opposed to the mainstream understanding of European culture or civilization was widespread in the interwar period. Authoritarian, fascist and national socialist regimes were not considered to be part of modern (European) civilization. The Holocaust – Auschwitz223 – marked the real rupture between National Socialism and European culture. The word “Zivilisationsbruch” as a scientific category is recent: Historian Dan Diner introduced it into the historical and political debate during the 1980s and encouraged a serious discussion. 224 But this discussion has left the underlying question unanswered: Is Auschwitz part of modernity, as Hannah Arendt and other scholars claim, or is it not? The collection edited by Diner begins by quoting a speech given by Leo Löwenthal at Columbia University in New York on 23 March 1945. It was the last in a series of conferences under the title “The Aftermath of National Socialism. On the Cultural Aspects of National Socialism”. Löwenthal spoke about “The Aftermath of Totalitarian Terror”, i.e. the Holocaust. He showed how Nazi terror ended civili-

221 Ibid., p. 12. 222 Ibid., p. 14. The Lycée is mentioned in Popescu, Stefan (2004): Les Français et la République de Kortcha (1916–1920). In: Guerres mondiales et conflits contemporains, No 213, p. 77–87, DOI: 10.3917/gmcc.213.0077. 223 Theodor W. Adorno was the first or one of the first intellectuals to use (in 1947) the name Auschwitz in German to designate the genocide of the European Jews by the Nazis as a whole. See Claussen, Detlev (1988): Nach Auschwitz. Ein Essay über die Aktualität Adornos. In: Diner, Dan (ed.): Zivilisationsbruch. Denken nach Auschwitz. Frankfurt am Main, p. 54– 68, here p. 55. 224 Diner, ed., Zivilisationsbruch, op. cit.

The Concept of Civilization, Colonialism and Europe – Conclusion

117

zation and reduced human beings to pure self-preservation. For him, like for many other intellectuals, this reduction was part of the logic of modern mass society.225 We can compare Löwenthal’s words to the last writings of anthropologist Bronisław Malinowski, who died in May 1942. His final work was published posthumously in 1947 by his wife Valetta Malinowska as “Freedom and Civilization”.226 In the USA, Malinowski gave several lectures on the question why it was necessary to fight Nazi Germany before deciding to address the issue in book form. The first draft was completed five weeks before his death, and his wife saw to its publication.227 Among other aspects, Malinowski describes the interwovenness of the contemporary world, asserting that the only possible form of organization would be democracy and a United Nations. Although Malinowski mentions the Nazi concentration camps, he obviously lacked detailed knowledge on their development after 1941, especially regarding the Auschwitz complex. This places him in the group of scientists writing on civilization “before Auschwitz”. Chapter VII of part V deals with “Totalitarianism, the Enemy of Freedom and Culture”. In it, Malinowski goes about analysing the relationship between National Socialism and civilization. He alternates between referring to Nazi Germany as the destroyer or killer of civilization and its transformer: “The avowed ends of totalitarianism are world domination, and the imposition of National Socialism on humanity as a whole. This is not a temporary condition (…) but a complete reconstruction of humanity and civilization.”228 On the following page, he speaks not of “reconstruction” but of a “menace”: “(…), the violation of human rights within the nation and in the conquered countries; and the destruction of free independent communities – makes it a menace to the whole of civilization.”229 And: “Totalitarianism thus destroys the substance of its own culture and transforms the nation into a blind instrument of power, a gigantic human factory of force.”230 Malinowski’s work shows the difficulties even experienced scholars faced when trying to understand the cultural meaning of twentieth-century totalitarianism, especially its Nazi manifestation.231 But let us return to the interwar years and the debate on culture and civilization – while keeping its eventual outcome in mind. 225 Löwenthal, Leo (1988): Individuum und Terror [1945]. In: Diner, ed., Zivilisationsbruch, op. cit., p. 15–25; see Dubiel, Helmut (1988): Kommentar zu Leo Löwenthals “Individuum und Terror”. In: Diner, Zivilisationsbruch, op. cit., p. 26–29. 226 Malinowski, Bronisław (1947): Freedom and Civilization [1942]. London. 227 Valetta Malinowska’s preface is dated New York, March 1944. 228 Malinowski, Freedom and Civilization, op. cit., p. 305. 229 Malinowski, Freedom and Civilization, op. cit., p. 306. 230 Malinowski, Freedom and Civilization, op. cit., p. 309. 231 The same is true in regard of Lucien Febvre’s lecture series on European civilization at Collège de France in 1944/1945: Febvre, Lucien (1999): L’Europe. Genèse d’une civilisation. Cours professé au Collège de France en 1944/45, établi, présenté et annoté par Thérèse Charmasson et Brigitte Mazon, avec la collaboration de Sarah Lüdemann. Préface de Marc Ferro. Paris.

118

III. Human Rights Leagues and the Idea of Europe During the Interwar Period

Ernest Bóta of the Hungarian League for Human Rights summarized the situation in Hungary during the early 1930s in a 24-page paper in 1931.232 He stated the following (the original somewhat inaccurate orthography has not been altered in the original French quotations): Depuis quelques temps les seigneurs feodaux hongrois multiplient leurs efforts pour troubler la paix d’Europe. (…) Mais les déclarations (…) nous oubligent de faire un exposé de nos appréciations, au sujet des derniers vestiges des magnats et de feodalité clericale, qui dirigent la Hongrie par un regime unique au monde. (…) Pendant que le régime se livre au pire vandalisme a l’interieur, pour brimer l’opposition quasi néante, les agents du comte Bethlen a l’étranger sont en contradiction flagrante avec leur maitre de l’interieur. Notament à l’avant derniére assemblée de la S.D.N. ces messieur ont protesté contre la domination des hordes barbares et balkaniques – c’est ainsi qu’ils se sont exprimés – sur la minorité hongrois séjournant en dehors des nouvelles frontiéres, ils ont également évoqué la supériorité de la culture hongroise, par rapport à ses voisines. A cette occasion il y a eu un débat très mouvementé au Parlement de Budapest sur le suffrage universel, figurez vous que tandis que le représentant de la dictature utilisait comme argument irréfutable la supériorité de culture contre le traité de paix de Trianon devant la S.D.N. le Ministre de l’Interieur, lui, parlait d’un façon véhément de l’i(n)suffisance de l’éducation du peuple hongrois. (…) Par contre nous puvons affirmer en toute sincérité que la nation hongrois est entiérement mûre pour diriger sa propre destinée, sans avoir recours à ses seigneurs feodaux. [For some time, Hungarian feudal lords have been multiplying their efforts to disturb the peace of Europe. (…) But the declarations (…) oblige us to make a statement of our appraisals on the subject of the last vestiges of the magnates and clerical feudality, which direct Hungary in a regime unique within the world. (…) While the regime indulges in the worst vandalism on the inside to counter the almost negligible opposition, Count Bethlen’s agents abroad are in flagrant contradiction of their master of the interior. Notably, at the last meeting of the League of Nations these gentlemen protested against the domination of the barbarian and Balkan hordes – this is how they spoke – over the Hungarian minority staying outside the new borders, [and] they likewise spoke of the superiority of Hungarian culture compared to its neighbours. On this occasion there was a very animated debate in the Budapest Parliament on universal suffrage, [and] imagine [that] while the representative of the dictatorship used the superiority of culture as an irrefutable argument against the Peace Treaty of Trianon before the League of Nations, the Minister of the Interior spoke vehemently about the insufficiency of the education of the Hungarian people. (…) On the other hand, we can affirm in all sincerity that the Hungarian nation is fully ripe to lead his own destiny, without recourse to its feudal lords.]

Bóta continued: Aujourd’hui nous retrouvons cesm [sic!] mêmes magnats et seigneurs (as under Habsburg rule 1848–1867; W.S.), qui exercent la dictature, au nom du christianisme et la “patrie”, cette fois ci non pas pour l’intérét de l’empereur, mais a leur propre intérêt au mépris de tout étiquette humaine. Afin de vous démontrer la bestialité de ce nouveau “christianisme” béni par l’aumonier Zadravetz, nous alons vous citer quelques chiffres relevés dans des documents déposés aux archives nationales ; (…) Le pouvoir dictatorial ne se contente pas de toutes ces atrocités (white terror; W.S.), et au lieu d’en punir les auteurs, le comte Bethlen a fait voter la fameuse loi humiliante pour les peuples civilisé, qu’est la “Numerus-Clausus” au moyen de laquelle il 232 BDIC, F delta res 0798/58, portfolio Hungarian league. Ernest Bóta: Le vrai visage de l’oligarchie Hongroise!, typescript, original, signed by Bóta, dated 14 March 1931.

The Concept of Civilization, Colonialism and Europe – Conclusion

119

a légalisé et perpetré l’antisemitisme en Hongrie. Les troubles qui se renouvellent systématiquement dans les Universités le prouvent irréfutablement. [Today we find these same magnates and lords (as under Habsburg rule 1848–1867; W.S.), who exercise dictatorship in the name of Christianity and the “homeland”, this time not for the sake of the interest of the Emperor, but in their own interest in defiance of all human etiquette. In order to show you the bestiality of this new “Christianity” blessed by the chaplain Zadravetz, we will quote some figures from documents deposited in the national archives; (…) The dictatorial power is not content with all these atrocities (white terror; W.S.), and instead of punishing the perpetrators, Count Bethlen has voted the famous abasing law for the civilized peoples, that is the “Numerus-Clausus” by means of which he legalized and perpetuated antiSemitism in Hungary. The disturbances which are systematically renewed in the Universities prove it irrefutably.]

He proceeds to contrast this gloomy picture of barbarism, vandalism, white terror, anti-Semitism and new slavery with a very different vision: Le peuple doit être maitre dans sa patrie, afin que la paix soit assurée en Europe centrale, et que la Hongrie puisse s’acheminer vers son développement. (…) Le peuple hongrois désire enfin voir la paix assurée (…). Il désire tout d’abord la Paix avec ses voisins, il veut se défaire de ce cercle d’acier qui l’enserre avec une puissance mortelle, aussi bien au point de vue économique que politique. Le peuple hongrois voit très bien que ce cercle d’acier a été crée par la politique égoiste des féodaux et s’il veut s’en libérer il faut briser le pouvoir de cette classe féodale. Il veut se placer sous la protection, et les bienfaits de la démocratie, de cette démocratie qui, non seulement le sortira de la boue, mais qui créé la solidarité avec les peuples démocratiques. [The people must be masters of their homeland, so that peace can be assured in Central Europe and Hungary can move towards its development. (…) The Hungarian people finally want to see peace assured (…). First of all, they want peace with their neighbours, they want to do away with this steel circle that encloses them with a deadly force, both economically and politically. The Hungarian people see very clearly that this circle of steel was created by the egoistic politics of these feudal lords, and if they wish to free themselves from it, it is necessary to break the power of this feudal class. They want to place themselves under the protection and the benefits of democracy, of the democracy that will not only pull them out of the mud but create solidarity with the democratic peoples.]

For Bóta, the rupture consisted in the fact that the Hungarian government under Count István Bethlen, prime minister from 1921 to 1931, installed a political and social regime that he associated with the Dark Ages and feudalism and contrasted with modern democracy. Although this rupture occurred within the framework of European history and culture, Bóta considered medieval feudalism as a political practice in the twentieth century to be not just an out-of-time phenomenon, but rather something that encouraged vandalism, new forms of slavery and antiSemitism. The human rights league in Basel, which was lobbying on behalf of political prisoners who had been sentenced to death by the Volksgerichtshof in Stuttgart (Germany) in 1937, compiled a 20-page report on the cruel situation in Hitler’s Germany. It not only contrasted the perceived “medieval despotism” with liberty and democracy, but also barbarism with humanism (meaning humanitarianism).

120

III. Human Rights Leagues and the Idea of Europe During the Interwar Period

Barbarism is a historical concept associated with prehistory, not with European civilization. The Basel league expounded: Aus Süddeutschland (Stuttgart; W.S.) – einst Hort der Freiheit und Demokratie gegen mittelalterliche Despotie und preussischen Militarismus – kommen Schreckensnachrichten, die die Menschheit aufhorchen lassen. Man glaubt sich in jene Zeit finsterster Barbarei versetzt, wie sie der grosse Sohn des Schwabenvolkes Friedrich Schiller vorfand, als er, von der berüchtigten Karlsschule herab seine Freiheitsworte gegen die Tyrannen schleuderte. (…) Seit Bestehen der nationalsozialistischen Herrschaft musste sich das human eingestellte Ausland immer wieder mit den barbarischen Methoden beschäftigen, die im Dritten Reich gegen die politischen Gegner angewandt werden und mit denen das gebildete und geachtete deutsche Volk vor den Augen der Welt besudelt und erniedrigt wird. [From southern Germany (Stuttgart; W.S.) – once a haven of freedom and democracy against medieval despotism and Prussian militarism – come terrible news that make mankind take notice. One feels displaced back to the time of darkest barbarism, as found by the great son of the Swabian people, Friedrich Schiller, when he hurled down his words of freedom against the tyrants from the notorious Karlsschule. (…) Since the beginning of the National Socialist rule, humane foreign countries have repeatedly had to deal with the barbaric methods used against political opponents in the Third Reich and with which the educated and respected German people is defiled and humiliated before the eyes of the world.] 233

An English brochure presumably edited in late 1938 by the British Cab-Drivers Anti-Fascist Committee (a communist pro-Jewish and anti-fascist organization) succinctly asks “Whither Civilization?”. It consists mostly of photographs with brief comments showing Nazi leaders like Streicher, Göring, Goebbels and Hitler on the one hand and famous Jewish scholars persecuted and forced into emigration by the Nazi regime – like Einstein, Freud, Ehrlich and Fried – on the other. Two text pages featured under the title “Back to the Middle Ages” report the events of the “Reichspogromnacht”, using the term “pogrom”. This section is followed by more photographs showing the public discrimination and criminalization of Jews as well as a burning synagogue in Berlin. The combination of photographs and short texts suggests the end of civilization in Germany and Austria. Like various other sources, the brochure emblematizes the “Zivilisationsbruch” with the label “Back to the Middle Ages” – thereby also signifying its barbarism.234 Several quotations in this chapter show that Greek and Roman antiquity as well as the modern period from the seventeenth century onwards were positively connoted in terms of the history of European civilization, with a special focus on the foundations of a democratic united or federated Europe. The Middle Ages, on the other hand, were generally considered “dark” and were associated with feudalism and political violence. Gonzague de Reynold differs slightly in this regard, 233 BDIC, F delta res 798/56, report by Basel League of Human Rights, undated but presumably second half of August 1937, 20 pages, quotation p. 1. 234 British Cab-Drivers Anti-Fascist Committee (1938): Whither Civilization? (Gale Primary Sources: Archives Unbound Collection, 7 pages, Microfilm Reel N o 37, Source Library: McMaster University Library, Gale Document Number: GALE|SC5110126543, http://tinyurl. galegroup.com/tinyurl/3wXWZ0, accessed 7 November 2016).

The Concept of Civilization, Colonialism and Europe – Conclusion

121

but he belonged to a political family that was not represented among the human rights leagues. Due to the specific human-rights-oriented perspective the leagues naturally had, the historic moment of 1789 and the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen were considered the beginnings of a new humanism and universalism inoculated with French civilization. This type of civilization was therefore (implicitly) regarded as absolute – and as a consequence, its dissemination throughout the world became a task or mission to accomplish. This justified colonialism, but not the use of violence and oppression. Following this general logic, the notion of a United States of Europe included the European colonies as a matter of course. As I have discussed in a previously published article, this idea survived the Second World War and had noticeable aftereffects in the postwar European movements and elsewhere.235 The “Frenchified” concept of civilization promoted cultural development, including that of indigenous peoples in the colonies. It thus effectively represented the opposite of the idea developed by Oswald Spengler in his “Decline of the West” published between 1918 and 1922. It was fully translated into English, French and Spanish, but only selected pages were translated into other languages like Italian and Greek before the Second World War. Translated or not, the “Decline” along with several other books written by Spengler later on incited vivid debates in newspapers, literary reviews and the like in most European countries as well as in the Americas. It seems that Spengler, who died in 1936, did not succeed in convincing a great many people that he was correct, but he nevertheless – and somewhat paradoxically – earned much admiration and fame as well as harsh criticism from leftist, conservative, catholic and fascist milieus. The debate about whether occidental or European culture possessed the capacity to develop further or not was part of the general context of ideas on European unity. Several of the leading members of some of the human rights leagues and/or other civil society associations were the same people who participated in this debate pursuing other purposes – like Henri Lichtenberger236 and Edmond Vermeil237 in France or Ortega y Gasset in Spain.238

235 Schmale, Wolfgang (2016): Gender and Eurocentrism. A Conceptual Approach to European History. Stuttgart, ch. IV, case study III.2: “Imperialism and Colonialism in the Early Discourses of European Integration”, p. 138–149. 236 See as a recent overview Gasimov, Zaur; Lemke Duque, Carl Antonius, eds. (2013): Oswald Spengler als europäisches Phänomen. Der Transfer der Kultur- und Geschichtsmorphologie im Europa der Zwischenkriegszeit 1919–1939. Göttingen. The book includes chapters on Spengler in Austria, Poland, Russia, the Netherlands, France, the United Kingdom, Spain (with Latin America), Italy, Greece, Turkey, and in Zionist debates. See also Merlio, Gilbert; Meyer, Daniel, eds. (2014): Spengler ohne Ende. Ein Rezeptionsphänomen im internationalen Kontext. Frankfurt am Main. This collection includes articles on the Spengler reception in Latin America, Japan, in Arabic-Islamic thinking etc. but largely extends beyond the interwar period. The authors are partially the same as in Gasimov/Lemke Duque. On Spengler in France, see Engels, David (2013): “Das Gescheiteste, was überhaupt über mich geschrieben ist”. André Fauconnet und Oswald Spengler. In: Gasimov/Lemke Duque, eds., Oswald Spengler als europäisches Phänomen, op. cit., p. 105–155, on Lichtenberger, see p. 108. More

122

III. Human Rights Leagues and the Idea of Europe During the Interwar Period

The material left by the human rights leagues shows that the ligueurs were not infected by the decline hypothesis. They tended to see a clear distinction between culture or civilization on the one hand and barbarism on the other, a distinction that had already been a central argument during the First World War. The human rights leagues were staunch advocates of moral disarmament – or, as it is now being called in historical sciences, of “cultural demobilization”.239 The efforts supporting Franco-German reconciliation were part of this process of cultural demobilization, which was ended by Hitler in 1933 and converted into its opposite. Cultural demobilization means the attempt to reorient people away from a culture of war and towards civil culture. The Imperial War Graves Commission, for example, decided that the wording of the inscription on the memorials under its responsibility should be “The Great War for Civilization”.240 Trans- and international contacts between veterans’ associations representing the former enemies also worked to counter bellicose mentalities in all areas.241 In conclusion, one can state – considering the differing directions the debate on culture and/or civilization could take during the interwar period – that the “Frenchified” concept of European civilization or culture was backed by the notion of moral disarmament or cultural demobilization as promoted by the League of Nations, and that it was the only concept encouraging the establishment of European unity. ***

237

238

239

240 241

recently: Demandt, Alexander (2017): Untergänge des Abendlandes. Studien zu Oswald Spengler. Cologne. Edmond Vermeil is mentioned by Engels, “Das Gescheiteste, was überhaupt über mich geschrieben ist”, op. cit., p. 114. In footnote 49, p. 114, Engels quotes the following book published by Vermeil: Doctrinaires de la revolution allemande (1918–1933). W. Rathenau, Keyserling, Th. Mann, O. Spengler, Moeller Van den Bruck, le groupe de la “Tat”, Hitler, A. Rosenberg, Günther, Darré, G. Feder, R. Ley, Goebbels, Paris 1938. Vermeil gave a speech at the LIDH congress on 31 July – 1 August 1937, Paris, on “Hitler’s conception of international law”; see Manceron, The French Ligue des droits de l’homme’s Interest in International Issues, op. cit., p. 63. On Spengler in Spain during the interwar period, see the very substantial article by Lemke Duque, Carl Antonius (2013): “Permanente Pseudo-Morphose” und “transitive Dekadenz”. Kulturkritische Resemantisierungen der Kultur- und Geschichtsmorphologie Oswald Spenglers im Echo der Madrider Presse (1920–1936). In: Gasimov/Lemke Duque, eds., Oswald Spengler als europäisches Phänomen, op. cit., p. 185–237. See Horne, John (2005): Kulturelle Demobilmachung 1919–1939. Ein sinnvoller historischer Begriff? In: Hardtwig, Wolfgang (ed.): Politische Kulturgeschichte der Zwischenkriegszeit 1918–1939. Göttingen, p. 129–150. Horne, Kulturelle Demobilmachung, op. cit., p. 141. See e.g. Weiß, Christian (2005): “Soldaten des Friedens”. Die pazifistischen Veteranen und Kriegsopfer des “Reichsbundes” und ihre Kontakte zu den französischen anciens combattants 1919–1933. In: Hardtwig, ed., Politische Kulturgeschichte der Zwischenkriegszeit, op. cit., p. 183–204.

The Concept of Civilization, Colonialism and Europe – Conclusion

123

The following chapter will analyse letters sent after the Second World War, mostly to Winston Spencer Churchill. While this entails a certain jump in time, it should not be understood as an omission of the Second World War. Rather, the period of the war will be innate in the letters. What the letter writers had to say or ask about Europe is inseparably linked to the war and the prewar years. As explained in the introduction to this book, I have therefore decided not to dedicate a separate chapter to concepts of Europe within the resistance movements during the Second World War – not least because a great deal of research has already been done on this subject.242 The problems addressed in the writings from the underground correspond to the fundamental issues raised by the human rights leagues, the Freemasons and other organizations prior to the war. As the main focus of existing research has been placed on organized Europeanists after the Second World War, it seems sensible to me to give some attention to the supporters of a united Europe who were not, or not yet, organized (or reorganized) after the war. Many of them would eventually find their way into active membership in one or the other pro-European movement. Churchill’s speeches and editorial pieces in newspapers on the topic of a “United States of Europe” undeniably commanded and focused the attention and awareness of many men and women.

242 See chapter I, “Introduction”.

IV. “MY DEAR MR. CHURCHILL …” INTRODUCTION At a time when Winston S. Churchill was not prime minister but “only” the leader of the opposition in the House of Commons (1945–1951), he backed the growing European Movement and soon became its charismatic figurehead. During this time, he also held a number of speeches extolling the idea of a United States of Europe, with the speech in Zurich on 19 September 1946 in particular reaching a large public and becoming very well known. Its impact persisted for several years, being repeatedly renewed by events such as the congress at The Hague in May 1948 and the foundation of the Council of Europe in 1949.1 During these years, hundreds if not thousands of letters from ordinary as well as prominent people who placed their hopes for European unity – for a United States of Europe – on Churchill were addressed to Churchill himself or to Duncan Sandys, the head of the European Movement. These letters were passed on to the secretary of the European Movement in London. Today, they are part of the archives transferred by the European Movement to the Archives of the European Union at the European University Institute (EUI) in Florence.2 The individual voices formulating their thoughts during the first postwar years constitute a supplement of sorts to the more famous thinkers who are generally well-known to scholars, such as Coudenhove-Kalergi, Winston Churchill, Jean Monnet, Altiero Spinelli and others. They constitute the “missing link” between the organized struggle for European unity (resistance movements and exile circles during the war, pro-European movements after the war) and “ordinary people” driven by a feeling of personal responsibility to help Europe unite. The focus of my subsequent analysis of the notions of Europe enunciated in the letters themselves as well as in their sometimes quite extensive attachments will be on the question of the significance of democracy and human rights within those notions. All quotations have been left in their original notation, with errors not corrected. The information pertaining to the social status, locations and biographies of the authors are taken from the letters themselves, and I have attempted to identify the respective authors in literature or via the Internet wherever possible.3 1 2

3

See chapter I, “Introduction”. For a brief history of these archives, see EUI, Archives of the European Union, https://archives.eui.eu/en/fonds/158645?item=ME, Fonds Inventory: ME Mouvement européen, https://archives.eui.eu/files/inventories/15269.pdf (open access). I have attempted to identify all authors of letters cited in this chapter, but it was not possible to do so in all cases.

126

IV. “My Dear Mr. Churchill …”

GENERAL CHARACTERIZATION OF THE LETTERS TO WINSTON CHURCHILL IN THE ARCHIVE OF THE EUROPEAN MOVEMENT Although there are several hundred letters in the archive’s holdings, they cannot be considered representative in a statistical sense. Who or what should they even be representative of ? The inventory mentions German, French, American, Austrian and other citizens as letter writers, but this classification is only partially correct. Some of the “Germans” were in fact Ukrainians, Romanians or persons of other nationalities living in exile in Germany at the time.4 The same applies to the authors classified as “French”, “American” etc. The assignment to countries apparently performed by the European Movement was based on the addresses, not on the nationalities or origins of the senders. However, due to the large numbers of letters from Germany and France, a few tendencies can be identified that may be cautiously interpreted as “German” or “French”. For most of the other countries, the number of documents is too small for any kind of meaningful tendencies to be analysed. There are a few letters each from several South American countries as well. In their totality, the letters must be considered individual testimonials, i.e. ego documents. Each one speaks for its respective author only, and there are too few of them to filter out any gender-specific, national or social patterns (meaning more than mere possible tendencies). Such statistical analysis would require several thousands of letters, which may originally have existed but are not present in the holdings of the European Movement today. As ego documents, the letters offer insights into the knowledge, terminology, views, convictions, emotions and hopes that were present among the populace and delivered to the politicians publicly advocating the idea of a united Europe. Churchill’s speeches and contributions in broadcast and print media in which he broached the subject of a united Europe had an influence on ordinary people: Suddenly, they felt personally and individually addressed and experienced the sensation that they could – or should – do something for Europe as well. Many apparently wanted to ask: “What can I do for Europe, Mr. Churchill?” Naturally, the letter writers also drew motivation from various other radio programmes, brochures and newspaper articles featuring or produced by other personalities besides Churchill, as well as from the new Council of Europe and its work. The latter was obviously frequently considered a disappointment, however – the people had expected much more “Europe” from it. Some letter writers presumably only became aware of the idea of Europe through Churchill, while others made reference to their own pertinent prewar 4

Letters from “Germans”: ME 279, 280, 281; letters from “Americans” and “Germans”: ME 282; letters from “Frenchmen” and “Germans”: ME 283; letters from “Frenchmen”: ME 637 and 639; letters from “Swiss”: ME 284; letters from “Austrians”: ME 285; letters from “Spaniards”, “Portuguese” and “Argentinians”: ME 286; letters from “Norwegians”: ME 287; letters from “Swedes” and “Norwegians”: ME 348.

General Characterization of the Letters to Winston Churchill

127

activities or included texts written in the 1930s or during the Second World War. Among the latter were several members of the Paneuropean Union of Count Coudenhove-Kalergi (e.g. Viktor Erdmann from Vienna, who introduced himself as a former assistant to Coudenhove-Kalergi5) and persons who claimed to have been close to the initiative or followed its activities. A certain “C. Freiherr von Preuschen”, president of the Frankfurter Gesellschaft6, attempted on 11 August 1950 to invite Churchill to deliver a lecture to the Gesellschaft in September of the same year; Churchill was in Strasbourg attending the Council of Europe at the time (where he received much encouraging mail) and had argued for the establishment of a European army in a speech on 11 August. Von Preuschen mentions that Coudenhove-Kalergi had “spoken about Pan-Europa” to the Frankfurter Gesellschaft in 1924 and “developed his programme in our circle”.7 Another letter writer claimed to have been a member of the German Liga für den Völkerbund in Berlin before the war;8 others had already joined the new Europa-Union9 or were planning to do so. One author described himself as already having been a federalist during the interwar period, and another mentioned his time as a Résistant. In all, the insights provided by the letters may perhaps form an image characteristic of the many persons – beyond the letter writers alone – who joined or intended to join the European Movement during the years after the Second World War. Most letters also indicate at least some level of previous knowledge concerning the idea of Europe. There is one that refers explicitly to the European initiative of Aristide Briand, for example. Several historical personalities who advocated the concept of a United States of Europe – or European unity in more general terms – during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries are mentioned by name or cited with appropriate texts: Giuseppe Mazzini, Victor Hugo, Paul Claudel,

5

6

7

8 9

ME 285; I am grateful to Anita Ziegerhofer, author of “Botschafter Europas. Richard Nikolaus Coudenhove-Kalergi und die Paneuropa-Bewegung in den zwanziger und dreißiger Jahren”, Vienna 2004, who looked through her archive material but could not identify Erdmann. Another example (ME 281) is Ernst Glaser from Munich (who introduces himself as a “Sudetendeutscher” and displaced person), letter to Dunstan Curtis, 1 January 1948: Glaser attached two letters from 1937 sent by the central office of the Paneuropean Union in answer to his letters to Coudenhove-Kalergi. This organization still exists: https://www.frankfurter-gesellschaft.de/. It was founded in 1919 and relaunched in 1947 with the support of Walter Hallstein, then rector of the Johann Wolfgang von Goethe Universität Frankfurt am Main; Hallstein later became the first president of the European Economic Community. ME 283, Letter by Freiherr von Preuschen, 11 August 1950, 2 pages, typescript, here p. 1. There were a large number of jurists among the male members of the Preuschen family. The invitation to Churchill was unsuccessful. ME 281, Letter by Friedrich Herbert Hofmann to Churchill at the Council of Europe in Strasbourg, 13 August 1949. For example: Marie-Luise Hagemann, Bremen, letter to Churchill, 9 December 1949; Hagemann introduces herself as a member of the executive committee of the Europa-Union in Bremen (ME 281).

128

IV. “My Dear Mr. Churchill …”

Ortega y Gasset and others. One sender from Germany, Günther Kirchhoff10, who wrote to Churchill respectively the European Movement several times starting in 1949, made reference to the Schuman Declaration of 9 May 1950 in a letter sent on 20 June 1950, commenting on the plan as follows: “This is no more and no less than the recreation of the work of Charlemagne on an expanded foundation.” His statement very much summed up the feelings and impressions of many of his contemporaries, and the EEC (European Economic Community) would later frequently be compared to the Carolingian empire due to its geography. Some letter writers may merely have wished to aggrandize themselves with their attached elaborations on Europe. Others wrote to Churchill because they did not entirely agree with all of his opinions. Churchill’s speeches and articles spoke in some way or another to people across the entire spectrum of political orientation. The authors of the letters kept in the archives range from former members of the Waffen-SS (one Frenchman and one Spaniard) to outspoken socialists. The fact that Churchill often made reference to Christianity in connection with his ideas for a united Europe attracted many supporters in Europe and the USA. If the entire collection of letters could be considered representative, a quantification of the relations to pro-European initiatives during the interwar period described or claimed by their authors might prove rewarding – but due to the limited size of the collection, as stated above, there is little point in even trying. We can safely say, however, that only a minority among the letter authors tried to establish bridges between prewar and postwar Europeanism by mentioning some form of previous engagement in pro-European movements. Others were diplomats or had a (voluntary or involuntary) “migration background” and thus presumably possessed a certain openness towards European issues due to their profession or biography. Individual letters also bespeak a more or less pronounced proximity to National Socialism or fascism. Nazis, Italian fascists and French supporters of the system of the “Etat français” under Marshal Pétain – in fact collaborators from everywhere in Europe – were often keen to engage in intensive pro-European propaganda that would not remain without formative consequences. Despite such possibly detectable profiles and tendencies, every letter or exchange of letters, every author, remains a specific and individual case, and every attempt I made to identify patterns was unsuccessful. This naturally has to do in part with the fact that – as far as Germany was concerned – the freedom of movement of individuals within and between the occupation zones was initially subject to restrictions and controls, making communication in general and the creation of new Europeanist networks in particular quite difficult. The dense infrastructure in terms of basic communication and the establishment of associations and networks that allows interested persons to readily participate in processes and 10 ME 279, Letter by Günther Kirchhoff, 20 June 1950. Kirchhoff wanted to prove that he was a relative of Churchill and his family. He attached several elaborations; one of these, written in German and English and dated 1 March 1950, is entitled “Vertrauliches Rundschreiben für die Mitglieder der Thoring-Sippen”. Searching for “Thoring” on the web brings up information on Kirchhoff.

Overview of Contents Using Selected Letters

129

activities had not yet been restored. This is also evident in the many letters explicitly asking for possibilities of joining a European initiative. In most countries, it was a laborious task to forge stable connections and establish continuous communicative relationships in the first years after the Second World War. Precisely those possibilities and assets that naturally lead to patterns forming in regard to people working toward a common goal, or in regard to subject matters and corresponding alignment, initially simply did not exist – or required an investment of energy that was hardly feasible on top of the effort involved in facing the challenges of day-to-day life. Besides the original incoming letters, the archive holdings also include the replies sent by the secretariat of the European Movement – sometimes as drafts, sometimes as carbon copies. Though always polite and encouraging, they are largely noncommittal. They thank the correspondents for the letters or brochures sent; sometimes the secretariat added material to its reply as well or pointed to appropriate organizations in the addressee’s country. Occasionally we find hand-written notes stating that no reply was to be sent – the European Movement was apparently not willing to engage in written confrontation in cases where the contents of incoming letters would have demanded objection. OVERVIEW OF CONTENTS USING SELECTED LETTERS Letters from Germany In the following, I will summarize my impressions of the “German” letters, which were not all sent by Germans and in part written in English – either by the authors themselves or by a translation office or someone else with sufficient knowledge of English. All of them are from the period between January 1948 and September 1950. Some of them are handwritten, some were written on typewriters. Several of the letters include drawings, composed hymns for Europe and similar additions; the authors were quite creative and imaginative. The thought that a united Europe would also have to present itself using audio-visual means was obviously there from the beginning. Coudenhove-Kalergi himself had already made suggestions concerning a European flag. Various passages were taken from existing texts. Coudenhove-Kalergi is among the most common sources, and there are frequent references to Oswald Spengler’s “Decline of the West” as well. Also included is the occasional forthright reiteration of the National Socialist race ideology. Many authors allude to Churchill’s speeches and texts or to current newspaper articles from various countries including the USA. Anyone who had material access to publications like “Le Monde” or the “New York Times” during the postwar years and was able to read them, however, can of course hardly be classified as “ordinary” or “insignificant” – as many self-characterizations read. Reference is also repeatedly made to persons from other countries who played influential roles in Germany before the war and then again thereafter. In the snip-

130

IV. “My Dear Mr. Churchill …”

pets below, we will encounter the publicist Dorothy Thompson as well as a citation of André François-Poncet (1887–1978), who served as French ambassador in Berlin for many years, then took part in the congress in The Hague in 1948 before returning to Germany in 1949 as high commissioner for the French occupation zone.11 I was unable to identify in the letters any Europe-related documents from the resistance movements during the Second World War, which comes as no surprise since access to such documents would have been very restricted. How numerous they nevertheless were is demonstrated by the research of Walter Lipgens, who published his first European collection of such documents translated into German in 1968.12 The spark that Churchill generated through his speeches and newspaper articles reached deep into the hearts and minds of many people, and in this regard, certain national peculiarities do suggest themselves to some degree. While letters from the USA and France often enthusiastically embrace the idea of a united Europe or United States of Europe without exhibiting much profoundness in terms of content, simply encouraging Churchill and others to continue along the chosen path, some of the German letters indicate that their authors were brooding over whether or what they themselves might have done wrong during the period of National Socialism. To write a letter to Churchill – or maintain a correspondence with the secretariat lasting a few months as a result of an initial such letter – apparently constituted an element of self-therapy for some. Otto Lips from Miltenberg am Main, for instance, wrote a letter on 19 November 1948 to American publicist Dorothy Thompson, who had published a “Botschaft an meine deutschen Freunde” [Message to my German friends] in the “Neue Zeitung” on 19 October. Thompson (1893–1961) was a women’s rights activist and distinguished journalist from the USA who had come to Europe in 1920. After spending some years in Vienna, she eventually established an office for the “New York Post” in Berlin in 1927. In 1931, she interviewed Hitler and wrote a book about him. Thompson was a friend of Thomas Mann’s and acquainted with several other famous authors, and she spoke fluent German.13 On 1 June 1949, Lips proceeded to write to Churchill, enclosing his previous letter to Thompson. This was followed until January 1950 by several further letters to and from Dunstan Curtis (deputy secretary general of the European Movement from 1947), who referred Lips to Eugen Kogon concerning potential 11 On André François-Poncet as a Europeanist see Schmale, Wolfgang (2009): Vom Homo Europaeus zum Homo Europeanus. Zur Debatte um den “europäischen Menschen” in den 1940er und 1950er Jahren. In: Bluche, Lorraine; Lipphardt, Veronika; Patel, Kiran Klaus, eds.: Der Europäer – Ein Konstrukt. Wissensbestände, Diskurse, Praktiken. Göttingen, p. 118–134, here p. 118–120. 12 Lipgens, Walter, ed. (1968): Europa-Föderationspläne der Widerstandsbewegungen 1940– 1945. Dokumentation. Munich (Schriften des Forschungsinstituts der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Auswärtige Politik, 26). 13 There is ample biographical research on Dorothy Thompson. For basic information, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dorothy_Thompson.

Overview of Contents Using Selected Letters

131

pro-European activities.14 A famous publicist, Kogon was a key figure in the developing European Movement in Germany at the time and had attended the congress in The Hague in 1948. Lips recapitulates his life so far; he introduces himself as an academic and Christian, married, with a young daughter, his mother living in the Eastern Zone. He reflects on his time in the Wehrmacht. Initially, he argues in favour of returning the former German colonies to the country – a view likewise held by French activists in the LDH and LIDH during the interwar period, as we have heard – but revises that position over the course of his correspondence with Curtis. In December 1949, he claims to have succeeded in establishing in Miltenberg a local chapter within the Bavarian regional association of the European Movement (EuropaUnion). The purpose of the majority of letters and postcards was to express approval of the various pro-European initiatives – and for obvious reasons, those sent from France usually referred primarily to the newly founded Council of Europe. But there were critical voices as well. I will cite a letter by a worker from Hamburg by way of example: Dated the 24th of April 1949, it was sent by a Mr. Ed. Lanzenberger, who introduces himself as a “construction worker”. Lanzenberger’s letter was written in reaction to an article by Churchill published in the “Hamburger Allgemeine Zeitung” on 8 April 1949 (“Ein Europa der Freiheit”); he had likely been a politically active worker, and dated clues in the letter place his age at around 60 or slightly above. Among other things, Lanzenberger wrote the following: Man hat erwogen, ob man Deutschland im Europäischen Rat aufnehmen soll oder nicht. Ich habe Arm- und Beinamputierte gesehen, aber noch keine Herzamputierten und Deutschland ist das Herz Europas. Wenn Europa gegeneinander zugrunde geht, dann bleibt nichts übrig als Miteinander zu leben und zu gedeihen. Das kann aber nur glücken, wenn Deutschland ohne jeden Vorbehalt und gleichberechtigt in die europäische Gemeinschaft aufgenommen wird. Nur ein Europa, in dem alle (emphasis by Lanzenberger; W.S.) Völker gleichberechtigt sind, das nicht nach der Pfeife zweier, der Führung gewohnter Völker tanzen muss, wird allen Völkern die Freiheit geben, die ihnen zusteht. (…) Die Volkstumsgrenzen sind die Staatengrenzen. Nur so kann Europa aus dem Elend herausgeführt werden. Wir in Westdeutschland haben noch nichts vom Aufbauen auf Menschenrechten gemerkt. Ein Bekenntnis zu seinem Volk und Vaterland wird schon als nationalistisch vermerkt. Unsere Publizistik muss wohl bei jeder Gelegenheit auf unsere grosse Schuld hinweisen. Offenbar ist das Zerschlagen unserer grossen Städte mit unersetzlichem Kulturgut, das Indentodschicken Zehntausender Frauen, Kinder und Männer in einer Nacht, das Beschiessen flüchtender Zivilbevölkerung nur harmloser Zeitvertreib gewesen. Wenn es die Charta der Menschenrechte gibt, dann ist nicht einzusehen, warum sie in den besetzten Westgebieten noch nicht zur Geltung gekommen ist. Es ist nicht abzuleugnen, dass die Westdeutschen auch zum Menschengeschlecht gehören. Ich habe bisher nur Unrechte gesehen, den Anständigen, wie den Unanständigen gegenüber. Sie bedauern viele alte und ehrwürdige Länder, die nicht in der Lage sind, sich zu Menschenrechten zu bekennen. Es gibt trotzdem genug Möglichkeiten, sich für Menschenrechte einzusetzen, man muss nur nicht darauf versessen sein, sie dort zu fördern, wo sie schon von anderer Seite auf ihre Weise gefördert werden.

14 Correspondence in ME 279.

132

IV. “My Dear Mr. Churchill …” [It has been considered whether to include Germany in the Council of Europe or not. I have seen people with arms or legs amputated, but never anyone with their heart amputated, and Germany is the heart of Europe. If Europe perishes against one another, then there is nothing left but to live and thrive together. This can only be successful, however, if Germany is accepted without any reservations and on an equal footing into the European community. Only a Europe in which all (emphasis by Lanzenberger; W.S.) peoples have equal rights, which does not dance to the fiddle of two peoples accustomed to leading, will afford to all peoples the freedom they deserve. (…) The borders of the peoples are the borders of the nations. Only in this way can Europe be guided out of its misery. We in West Germany have noticed nothing of the building upon human rights as yet. An avowal of one’s own people and fatherland is already noted as nationalistic. It seems our journalism must point out our great guilt at every opportunity. The breaking up of our large cities with their irreplaceable cultural assets, the sending of tens of thousands of women, children and men to their deaths in a single night, the firing at the fleeing civil population have apparently been but harmless amusement. If the Charta of Human Rights exists, then I fail to see why it is not yet being applied in the occupied western areas. It cannot be denied that the West Germans are also part of humankind. I have hitherto seen only injustices done to the decent people as well as to the indecent. You lament many old and venerable countries that are unable to avow themselves to the human rights. But there are still enough possibilities to advocate for human rights, one does not have to be obsessed with promoting them only where they are already being promoted by someone else in their own way.] 15

Similar criticisms implying that (West) Germany was being treated unfairly or discriminated against can be found in other letters as well. This issue struck a chord with many of Germans.16 While some authors wished to actively contribute to European respectively Franco-German reconciliation, engaging in self-therapy by way of pro-European undertakings, others who may have had close ties to the Nazi regime, like Hans-Georg Kemnitzer17, were bogged down by German selfpity. Some letters were also merely attempts to improve the writer’s personal, professional or material situation. For the abovementioned reasons, statistical analysis of the letters makes little sense. Some authors provide explicit information on their social status, and in some cases this information can be determined from other sources – but there remain many cases in which definitive social classification is impossible. The senders of letters frequently describe themselves as “ordinary”, e.g. as an “einfacher Mann aus dem Volke” [ordinary man from the folk], as written in January 1948 by the displaced Sudeten German Ernst Glaser, who claims to have been a member of the Paneuropean Union before the war and refers to a radio lecture he had allegedly given (see below). “Ordinary” thus generally did not 15 ME 279. 16 See Hoffmann, Stefan Ludwig (2011): Introduction. Genealogies of Human Rights. In: Hoffmann, Human Rights in the Twentieth Century, op. cit., p. 1–26, here p. 15. 17 ME 281, letter dated Berlin, 26 February 1950. Kemnitzer had connections to Goebbels; his name appears in 1951 in connection with the Goebbels diary affair; cf. article in “Der Spiegel”, 24 January 1951, p. 8–12, http://www.spiegel.de/spiegel/print/d-29191941.html. Kemnitzer is mentioned in Goebbels’s diary, see Institut für Zeitgeschichte, ed. (2007): Die Tagebücher von Joseph Goebbels, Teil III, Register 1923–1945, vol. 1: Geographisches Register. Personenregister. Berlin – Boston: de Gruyter, Saur (eBook 2012), p. 344.

Overview of Contents Using Selected Letters

133

mean something like “uneducated” or possessing only a low level of education, but should instead be interpreted as a self-definition in relation to the well-known politicians and intellectuals who dominated public discourse. Many had already been engaged in pro-European activities before the war. Letters were written by teachers, craftspersons and small business owners, musicians, nobles, artists and filmmakers, but also by workers; in principle, it is largely the middle class that we see here. Around a quarter of the letters in the archive were written by women. Some authors had spent parts of their lives in foreign countries like China or Sweden or were displaced persons or emigrants. The key ideas and concepts found in the letters can be roughly subsumed as follows: The idea of Europe is generally delineated only briefly, with the term “United States of Europe” sometimes being used explicitly. While there are a few lengthier and more substantial elaborations, some of them tend to lapse into the esoteric. As mentioned already, some of the letter writers had been connected to the Paneuropean movement or some other pro-European initiative during the interwar period. Besides the direct references to Churchill, many texts allude – depending on their date – to the Council of Europe, the Marshall Plan, the Schuman Plan or the European Movement. Sometimes self-generated material or newspaper articles are enclosed and mentioned in the text body. Like in the letter by Mr. Lanzenberger cited above, reference is also regularly made to journalistic contributions by other persons besides Churchill. The writing of such letters constituted a form of participation in journalistic debates. Important themes besides the frequently mentioned personal aspects are reconciliation with former enemies, the “saving of the Occident” [Rettung des Abendlandes], Christianity (a topic often used by Churchill as well), peace, human rights, and anti-Bolshevism, anti-Stalinism and anti-Communism. The sources show quite unambiguously that the (German) writers of the letters did not hail from the left of the political spectrum, rather from the Christian conservative middle or somewhere to the right of it. We will encounter a letter below whose female author quite bluntly enunciated race-ideological views. Letters from France The “French” letters span the period between December 1946 and August 1951, and the political as well as the social spectrum of their authors seems broader than among the German letters. The writers include a former soldier of the Waffen-SS as well as a Résistant, several Anciens Combattants, socialists, Frenchmen and Frenchwomen as well as emigrants, e.g. from Italy or Austria. Some of the letters are from associations and organizations with pro-European or other idealistic legal agendas, or from small businesses. The degree of organization in terms of associations and other groups is significantly higher than for Germany. One of the preserved letters is a sarcastic one by the French literary critic Charles Eubé dated 24 December 1946 (which is certainly no coincidence) and addressed to “Son Excellence Monsieur Winston CHURCHILL Esq., Leader of

134

IV. “My Dear Mr. Churchill …”

H.M. Opposition, House of Commons, LONDON”. Presumably as a reaction to corresponding reports from the Nuremberg Trials, Eubé makes reference to the production of soap using the ashes and grease from the corpses incinerated in the concentration camps, enclosing two relevant photos. If German prisoners of war working in French mines now complained about not being given enough soap, he suggests, those “displaced persons” should be handled the same way as the captives in Auschwitz, as this would remedy the lack of soap and stimulate the German soap industry – and there would be no danger of a “universal conscience” becoming upset about it.18 Eubé’s letter was one of those that the secretariat of the European Movement marked “NO ANSWER”. On 29 January 1947, Michel Junot (1916–2008) wrote to “Monsieur le Premier Ministre” – meaning Churchill. Junot had been a Résistant and claimed to have been decorated with the “Médaille de la Résistance” and the “Croix de Guerre”. He did not mention that he had also been a sous-préfet (subprefect) in the Vichy regime as well as holding various other offices in the Pétain government.19 Junot wrote to Churchill in his function as president of the Centre international d’échanges culturels et sociaux (Paris, 16th arrondissement), which he had founded together with several “camarades de maquis”. The goal of the institution was to “(…) développer les relations et les contacts entre les jeunes, étudiants, ouvriers et techniciens, qui ont souffert et lutté en commun pour un même idéal dans toutes les nations d’Europe et du monde” [(…) develop relations and contacts between young people, students, workers and technicians who have suffered and fought together for the same ideal in all the nations of Europe and the world]. Junot wrote of his own admiration and that of his companions for Churchill during the war. He put forth no pleas or demands, restricting himself to pure information. At the same time, however, he documented the existing bridge between the resistance and engagement for a united Europe in the years after the Second World War.20 Writing in English on 18 March 1947, Mademoiselle Colette Netter asked for information, explaining that “I am a french girl who is quite interested in your

18 ME 637, letter by Eubé on the specified date. 19 Junot remained a controversial figure in France until his death. He was involved in several trials in connection with his career as a functionary in the “Etat français” and denied accusations of having been involved in decisions concerning the deportation of Jews. In 1997, the magazine “Le Point” printed a testimonial by Jean-Claude Aaron confirming Junot’s important function in the Résistance: http://www.lepoint.fr/actualites-chroniques/2007-01-26/ le-temoignage-de-jean-claude-aaron-sur-michel-junot/989/0/95859 (originally 8 February 1997). The case was also brought before the European Court of Human Rights, which ruled in Junot’s favour: https://merlin.obs.coe.int/iris/2004/5/article2.en.html (all accessed 12 September 2018). 20 ME 637, hand-written letter by Michel Junot to (Churchill) on 29 January 1947, 2 pages, letterhead of the Centre.

Overview of Contents Using Selected Letters

135

movement. Every Sunday Afternoon I listen to your Emission ‘United Europe’ and I should like to know more about it.”21 August Moeslinger, a native Austrian who had taught foreign languages at high schools in France from 1930 to 1943 and was working at the “Institution St. Joseph” in Épinal22 at the time of his writing (14 June 1947), referred to Churchill’s thoughts on Western civilization and Christianity in particular. He too viewed them as the foundation on which postwar Europe should be built. He also emphasized that he had been able to avoid any form of collaboration with the National Socialists in Germany and that he considered himself part of the West, of Western civilization, despite being from Austria. The English in the letter is excellent – if it was Moeslinger’s own, we can presume he was an English teacher. Yet another letter (Paris, 6 May 1948) came from a native Italian, as noted explicitly in the address line by its author Captain Francesco Marabini.23 Marabini praises Churchill’s initiatives and adds: “Vous scellez la première pierre de cet immense édifice de la solidarité umaine [sic!], vous réalisez le rêve de Giuseppe Mazzini.” [You seal the first stone of this immense building of the humane solidarity, you realize the dream of Giuseppe Mazzini.] He makes reference to the Anciens Combattants and the victims of two world wars whose support for the constitution of Europe was very useful. Marabini was convinced that the future belonged to the “Peuples fraternellement unis pour la Paix du Monde et pour la Gloire de Dieu” [peoples fraternally united for the peace of the world and for the glory of God].24 Among the writers of letters from France were several authors and activists who sent Churchill extensive treatises or chapters of books. Henry Lepeytre (1883–1970), for example, wrote about his new book “Le Retour à la Paix”, which was published by Fayard in 1947.25 Angelo Fornaro (Paris, 12 February 1947) mentioned a letter he had sent to Churchill as early as 1936, and enclosed with his long typewritten letter a 16-page manuscript (likewise typewritten) on the question “Futurs Etats-Unis d’Europe?” that he had also sent to several ambassadors.26 These examples solidify the impression that the letters sent from France – which by no means were all written by French men and women – were based on already rather well-structured pro-European activities. 21 ME 637. 22 For a brief profile, see http://data.bnf.fr/12731981/institution_saint-joseph_epinal/ (accessed 12 September 2018). 23 A Francesco Marabini is mentioned in the journal “La Voix du Combattant” (Paris), vol. 15, No 826, 1 June 1935, p. 2, open access: https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k6268906d/f2. item.r=Marabini (accessed 12 September 2018). The article reports on Marabini appearing as vice-president of the “Volontaires Italiens” at a ceremony in Paris at the Arc de Triomphe on 24 May 1935 (commemorating Italy’s entry into the First World War on 23 May 1915). 24 ME 637. 25 Lepeytre, Henry (1947): Le Retour à la Paix. Paris: Fayard (the Bibliothèque nationale in Paris keeps this book in its 8th edition, but chronicles no earlier editions). 26 ME 637.

136

IV. “My Dear Mr. Churchill …”

The thrust of some letters is simply somewhere between encouraging and demanding in regard to the assembly of the Council of Europe in August 1950 in Strasbourg: Monsieur CHURCHILL, au nom de M.M. Les Maires de mon Canton et en mon nom personnel, nous vous demandons de ne pas quitter STRASBOURG avant d’avoir fait l’Europe ! [Mr CHURCHILL, on behalf of M.M. Les Maires of my Canton and in my personal name, we ask you not to leave STRASBOURG before having made Europe!] 27

Churchill’s presence in the region in August 1950 – he also travelled to Nancy, for example – seems to have motivated many writers, as there are several letters like the one quoted above from France during this period. Anciens Combattants in particular became engaged; they had fought two wars against “tyranny” and “slavery” and hoped to secure peace at last. One entrepreneur from Strasbourg wrote: “Personnellement je prends la liberté de vous dire: Vous n’avez pas le droit de nous décevoir. L’Europe Unie DOIT se faire au cours de cette session encore.” [Personally, I take the liberty of saying to you: You have no right to disappoint us. United Europe MUST be done during this session.]28 Underneath his signature, the author – one René C. Dottor – added the following: “Orphelin de guerre 1914, Engagé volontaire 1939, Croix de guerre 39/40, Ex-prisonnier évadé, Membre de la résistance 42/45, Père de 5 enfants.”29 Among the postcards written to Churchill in Strasbourg is one by “un groupe de Lorrains” with fourteen signatures and a simple appeal: “Comptons sur vous pour faire l’Europe unie. Sans torpiller le plan Schumann [sic!] s’il vous plait!” [We count on you to make a united Europe. Without torpedoing the Schumann [sic!] plan please!]30 The archive’s collection features several such collective postcards from France. Also included is a short letter by a twelve-year-old schoolboy from Nancy written in neat cursive: J’ai 12 ans, j’ai quatre petits frères et sœurs notre sort est entre vos mains si vous faites l’Europe nous pourrons vivre heureux et libre nous avons confiance en vous ne nous trahissez pas. Faites l’Europe. [I am 12 years old, I have four little brothers and sisters our fate is in your hands if you make Europe we will be able to live happy and free we trust you do not betray us. Make Europe.] 31

The boy received a detailed reply containing the following request from the international secretariat of the European Movement: “Mr. Churchill (…) vous demande (…) de vous préparer à faire plus tard des sacrifices en faveur de

27 ME 283, letter by Ferron, Conseiller Général de Plélan-le-Grand, Maire de St. Péran, Ille-etVilaine, 21 August 1950, 1 page, typescript. 28 ME 283, letter by René C. Dottor, 21 August 1951. 29 “Croix de Guerre 39/40” may be a reference to the cross given out by the Vichy regime, which was no longer permitted to be worn after the liberation of France. 30 ME 283, postcard, August 1950. 31 ME 283, letter by Jean-Louis Jacques, collège de la Malgrange, Nancy, 11 August 1950.

Overview of Contents Using Selected Letters

137

l’Europe Unie.” [Mr. Churchill (…) asks you (…) to prepare to make later sacrifices for the benefit of the United Europe.]32 The Mouvement de Graal, France felt compelled to write to Churchill and send him an issue of its monthly journal published in three languages: “La Communication – The Communication – Die Verbindung”. It was signed by the association’s president Alfred Grégoire, professor at the Music Academy of Strasbourg. The enclosed issue No 7, dated August 1950, deals with the United States of Europe from the perspective of the “homme européen” among other topics. It differentiates slightly between Latin, Germanic, Nordic and Slavic (Russian) Europe, but overall still concludes: “Tous les genres cependant représentent dans leur ensemble le type idéal de l’‘homme’.” [All varieties, however, as a whole represent the ideal type of “man”.]33 Letters from the USA My dear Mr. Churchill – These two articles interested me so much when I read them and then in going over some old papers I came across this article by Victor Hugo which I thought might interest you. May God give you strength to make his dream come true – America will help you. Sincerely yours, Mary Elisabeth Gearon.34

The author of the above message dated 17 January 1947 was from Brooklyn, New York, and the letterhead very traditionally identifies her as “Mrs. Edmund A. Gearon”. Enclosed is a typewritten copy of the famous text “A day will come …” (opening address to the Peace Congress in Paris, 21 August 1849) by Victor Hugo. Some of the letters sent from the USA are from persons born in Europe who had been living in the United States for a short or sometimes a longer period of time. The others were written by authors apparently born in the USA as far as can be discerned. Some included brochures with what can be referred to as plans for Europe that were elaborated during the Second World War. With the establishment of the ERP – the European Recovery Programme, better known as the Marshall Plan – that programme became an important point of reference. The democratic and legal foundations of the state, i.e. the constitution, are treated as self-evident in letters from the USA – an aspect that remains the exception in letters from Germans. Here and there, a dollar cheque is mentioned as an enclosure. The suggestions concerning the unification of Europe are practical and concrete. Churchill, who delivered his speeches on Europe in the USA as well (see Introduction) is generally met with enthusiasm.

32 ME 283, reply to Jean-Louis Jacques, 25 September 1950, carbon copy. 33 ME 283, article by Dr. Alfred Fischer: Les Etats-Unis d’Europe. In: La Communication, 1959, No 7, August, p. 3–4, here p. 3. Article also in English, but not in German. 34 ME 282, letter by Mary Elisabeth Gearon, 17 January 1947, handwritten.

138

IV. “My Dear Mr. Churchill …”

The consensus among the emigrants from Europe in regard to encouraging the USA to support the European unification efforts is emblematized in the following letter written on 5 March 1947 by Albert Léon Guérard (1880–1959) from Stanford University35, California, to the “Chairman United Europe Committee”: I am deeply interested in the problem of European unity, upon which I have been working for nearly half a century. (…) Count Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi, of New York University, could easily tell you the names of men who could form the nucleus of an American committee. I have in view, the Committee should be composed mainly of people who have been Americans for more than one generation. This would rule out Coudenhove-Kalergi, Thomas Mann, G. A. Borgese, and (toutes proportions gardées) myself.36

Guérard signed as “Professor of General & Comparative Literature, Emeritus” and attached several statements of praise for the book “L’Europe libre et unie” by G. A. Borgese and Thomas Mann, published in February 1947 by Parisian publisher La Colombe, Editions du Vieux Colombier, and mentioned in the letter. Letters from Other Countries A small holding (ME 348, ME 287) contains letters from Norway and Sweden. Einar F. Rustad wrote to Churchill from Lier (Norway) on 20 January 1947: This letter is written by a former member of the nazi youth movement in Norway (…). (…) The reason why I am writing to You, is my great interest for Your planning of the United States of Europe. When so many young people joined the nazi movement, one of the reasons was that the germans expressed their wish to see an united Europe arise. My heart and the hearts of many other young people were filled with that idea. And we believed that Great Britain and the Sovjet were unwilling to approve such a plan. Now I can see that I have mistaken in many ways, but not in all ways.37

Rustad subsequently discussed Churchill’s ideas critically; he feared that the united Europe would effectively represent a “Western Bloc” of countries, and he saw no answers to the question of social justice.38 Secretary Ture Anderson of the Society for Scandinavian Cooperation and Friendship located in Gothenburg sent an excerpt of Victor Hugo’s speech at the International Peace Congress in Paris in 1849 to Churchill on 23 February 1947. Claus Carstens, who had penned a treatise on Europe under the pseudonym Henning Christiansson out of consideration for his relatives in the Soviet occupation zone in East Germany, approached Churchill with a request for advice (2 February 1948, Ekebybruk, Sweden). His letter refers to contacts he had had with the Swiss Europa-Union in 1942. Carstens also included a summary of an essay on 35 See the archive there, inventory: http://pdf.oac.cdlib.org/pdf/stanford/mss/m0957.pdf (accessed 12 September 2018). 36 ME 282, letter by Albert Guérard, 5 March 1947, typescript. 37 ME 348, letter by Rustad, p. 1. 38 ME 348, letter by Rustad, p. 2.

Priorities

139

the topic of a “European Union”, mentioning that he had sent the same text to Victor Gollancz (1893–1967) in London as well.39 Gollancz was among the leading Europeanists of his time. One further letter is worthy of mention as it demonstrates connections between postwar Europeanism and the prewar and wartime civil society. It was written in Shanghai on 23 March 1947 by Karin Lindskog, who uses the letterhead of the Scandinavian Women’s Association and states her intent to return to Sweden in May of 1947 after having lived in Shanghai for 20 years. 40 Lindskog writes that she had been the president of the Scandinavian Women’s Association in Shanghai with 110 members for some time as well as having been “ex-Vicepresident of Joint Committee of Shanghai Women’s Organizations (18 nationalities)”. She was quite excited about Churchill’s ideas for Europe and pointed to her good experiences with the proximity of people from various countries in Shanghai. According to Lindskog, every European country needed a handful of Europe enthusiasts for the process to be successful. PRIORITIES When trying to determine what was most important to authors of letters to Churchill, we find a broad spectrum of answers. Naturally, such letters did not necessarily represent an occasion for elaborating one’s complete set of views regarding Europe – but certain priorities influenced by ongoing developments are discernible. In 1950, the Korean War brought the issue of security distinctly into the foreground, causing many a letter writer to focus on questions of military defence and the establishment of a European army. Others emphasized the defence and preservation of European culture, while still others called for the drafting of a European constitution. Some considered a common European language important. As discussed before, the latter had been a major topic in the conceptions of Europe during the interwar period and would remain a central idea even after the Second World War. In the following, I will discuss some of these priorities more specifically. Europe as a Civilization Like the Freemasons and human rights leagues between the wars, many of the writers of letters to Churchill engaged with questions of European civilization or culture. We have seen how closely the individual notion of civilization or culture correlated with the respective concepts of Europe and democracy. To verbalize these connections was obviously difficult for some authors, however. It is for this 39 ME 348, letter by Carstens, 1 page; essay “European Cooperation. A Summary of Henning Christiansson: An European Union”, 6 pages, typescript. 40 ME 348, hand-written letter by Lindskog, dated Shanghai, Sunday, 23 March 1947.

140

IV. “My Dear Mr. Churchill …”

reason that one man writing to Churchill from New York – Frank Bitsanis – stands out for his interweaving of culture and democracy, and his initiative warrants being introduced in detail. Bitsanis was born in Arini Olympia (Greece) in 1895, emigrated to the USA in 1912, and fought in the U.S. Army during the First World War. In 1920, he married a German woman and founded an import-export trading firm in Germany before returning to the United States in 1926.41 In 1944, he established the United States of Europe Association Inc. together with other immigrants from Europe.42 The association’s board was comprised of the following persons: Dr. WM. [sic!] Schmitz, Vice-President, Louis Baehr, Secretary, P. Argyropoulos, Treasurer, D. Innazzo, Rec. Secretary. The same names appear in a list of “Directors” that also includes Prof. J. K. Lee and Ben Ruscher.43 Due to possible loss of records, it is impossible to tell how many letters Bitsanis wrote to Churchill. The oldest preserved letter is dated 3 October 1946 and refers to Churchill’s Zurich speech on 19 September 1946. In it, Bitsanis emphasizes the overlapping of interests between Churchill’s goals and his own organization. In another letter on 17 February 1947, he writes: Dear Sir, we have read with rapt interest of your formation of the United Europe Organization and consider it a great step in the forward march of peace and freedom of Europe. (…) Also, we wish to take this opportunity, to present to you a program of the United States of Europe Association, a humanitarian, non-political, non-profit, non-sectarian organization whose purpose is to organize Europe along free democratic lines with freedom, justice, religious liberties and a durable peace as its aims.44

Enclosed is a fourteen-page typewritten brochure explaining the ideational foundations of the association and asserting a connection between (European) culture and democracy in a fashion otherwise rare among the other letters and attached treatises. The brochure begins by mentioning the support for the association by Franklin D. Roosevelt, Winston Churchill, the Senate Military Affairs Committee, the Senate Committee on Education and Labour, the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives and a number of unspecified foreign embassies. The general intention of the association is summarized as follows: The following are the principles and views of the U.S.E. Ass., a group interested only in bringing freedom, peace, justice and prosperity to a united democratic Europe. 45

41 I attempted to identify Bitsanis through further sources but was unsuccessful. I am immensely grateful to my Greek colleague Olga Katsiardi-Hering, Athens, who put great effort into helping me. 42 ME 282, brochure “U.S.E. Association, Inc. United States of Europe. Chartered March 1944”, 14 pages, typescript. Autobiographical information p. 13–14. 43 ME 282, list of names as part of preprinted letter paper, letter by Frank Bitsanis to Churchill, 3 October 1946. 44 ME 282, letter by Frank Bitsanis, 17 February 1947, 1 page. 45 ME 282, brochure “U.S.E. Association, Inc. United States of Europe. Chartered March 1944”, 14 pages, typescript, p. 2.

Priorities

141

One axis of the brochure’s argumentation is based on the claim that small countries were no longer able to ensure their own safety, while another states that “Europeans are determined to perpetuate their civilization. And as regards its civilization, Europe intends to continue making its contribution to world civilization.”46 The latter would only be possible, however, if Europe were to organize itself differently – namely jointly – in the face of the economic and military revolution. Europe is viewed as a cornerstone of world peace. This perspective of a global placement of the idea of a United States of Europe is perspicacious and goes beyond the navel-gazing still dominating in Europe to this day. It is repeated several times: Thus, an assemblage of crippled European nations is not the sort of association called for in the interest of either world peace or European prosperity, or a democratic international order. A United States of Europe is the only form of association imaginable which would be practical and beneficial to all.47

And slightly further on in the text: A divided of diatribal Europe is out of step with the march of civilization; a United Europe can readily become the coping stone in the arch of U.N. and the pledge of world peace for generations to come.48

The following sentence puts the philosophy forming the foundation for the EEC Treaty adopted ten years later in the proverbial nutshell: The discontent arising out of unjust or intolerable social and economic conditions is a greater threat to democracy and to the peace and happiness of mankind than is the immediate threat of arms.49

Likewise surprisingly commensurate to the philosophy of the later European Union is the following passage: A United States of Europe is the only guarantee of a real though limited political independence of individual European states. It provides the maximum military and economic security. It offers the utmost freedom of circulation in man, money, goods and thought. Without it, a free float of trade cannot be restored to Europe. It permits complete cultural autonomy. It builds an order of economic cooperation which renders military conflict unnecessary. In other words it reduces military conflict or the threat of it, without reducing but rather enlarging economic efficiency and the national social welfare. Accordingly, it promises positive and lasting peace, prosperity and progress in Europe. 50

The author or authors of the text considered the common culture of Europe a crucial benefit in a world generating more and more federations (among which are enumerated the USA, the UN, the Pan-American Union, the USSR and others, with even India being mentioned):

46 47 48 49 50

Ibid., p. 3. Ibid., p. 4. Ibid., p. 7. Ibid., p. 4. Ibid., p. 6.

142

IV. “My Dear Mr. Churchill …” The European peoples have fundamentally common cultural background stemming first from Christendom and then from the Renaissance tradition. The cultural unity of Europe is actually more closely knit, older and more homogeneous than that of any of the federated or federating commonwealths of our time. Consequently, Europe, besides being driven to the formation of a United States by military security and economic necessity, possesses a natural and most solid ethic foundation for the creation of a United States of Europe.51

According to the brochure, these positive cultural preconditions also included the federating power of the Holy Roman Empire in an epoch during which this had been far more difficult to achieve. A federated Europe was therefore quasi a logical consequence of European culture and its history. The democratic and constitutional foundations of a united Europe are subsequently articulated explicitly and precisely: The framework of a functioning United States of Europe would call for certain elements which are essential to unity, efficiency and higher standards of human welfare. The minimum of such elements would seem to be: Political 1. A Constitution, a truly representative Constituent Assembly; a Bill of Rights insuring to all people equal rights and all the freedom now enjoyed, for example, by the people of the United States of America. 2. Political autonomy of individual States under the Union Constitution.

Other points include the economy, the military and, under the heading “Cultural”, the diversity of languages along with a recommendation of a common official language. Also recommended are the joint training of diplomats and a common supreme court.52 The final sections of the brochure refer to the United Nations and the role of a united Europe within them before presenting the founding history of the association under president Frank Bitsanis. The following positional descriptions from other letters frequently exhibit significant divergencies compared to Bitsanis’s largely very lucid text. Europe as the Occident – “Saviour of the Occident” Despite the pragmatism and sense of reality that characterized Churchill as a politician, he was sufficiently conservative and explicitly Christian-minded to appeal to a very broad audience within Europe and beyond. Many people could identify with his speeches and keywords. As we have already seen, this likewise applied to passive and active supporters or collaborators of National Socialism. It was in these milieus that the concept of the Occident played an important role.53 51 Ibid., p. 7. 52 Ibid., p. 8–9. 53 “Abendland” (the “Occident” or “West”) constitutes a field of research of its own; the renaissance of the notion has also enhanced research in the humanities. Nevertheless, the following seminal study remains an important reference: Faber, Richard (1979): Abendland. Ein “politischer Kampfbegriff”. Hildesheim. Bruneteau, Les “collabos”, op. cit., ch. 3.

Priorities

143

The term itself possesses a wide spectrum of denotation and cannot simply be reduced to a single philosophy or way of thinking, but it was usurped and furnished with meaning and context by fascism, National Socialism and other authoritarian and anti-democratic regimes all the same. And although this practice was quite successful, the concept of the Occident retained its relevance across the political spectrum. In the following, I will cite a few letters that reflect this breadth of interpretation. Fritz Kleiber, who introduced himself as a textile trader formerly in Berlin and now in Hamburg, wrote on 12 August 1950: Lieber Herr Churchill (…), Gott segne Sie zum Nutzen der cultivierten Welt & zum Segen des Abendlandes, versuchen Sie den Untergang den Spengler voraussagte zu verhindern, Sie allein sind bis heute das Aushängeschild von ganz Europa & außer Ihnen hat Stalin keinen Gegenspieler den er für ernst nimmt! (…) In vorzüglichster Hochachtung “Retter Europas” herzlichste Grüße (…) [Dear Mr. Churchill (…), God bless you for the benefit of the cultured world & for the blessing of the Occident, attempt to prevent the downfall predicted by Spengler, you alone are the figurehead of Europe to this day & aside from you Stalin has no adversary he takes seriously! (…) With the greatest respect “saviour of Europe” kindest regards (…)] 54

Kleiber stood in the tradition of a very conservative interpretation of the Occident dating from before the world wars, in which the slogan “saviour of the Occident” was quite common. In this philosophy, there was an insurmountable divide between the Occident and the general concept of culture and civilization on the one side and Bolshevism on the other – they were irreconcilable opposites.55 As noted in the introduction to this book, Churchill regularly spoke about the danger of Stalinism for Western Europe, and the issue struck a chord with many of his contemporaries. The equation of the “Christian Occident” with “Europe” occurs almost at a formulaic level in many letters; it appears as a fundamental conviction requiring no justification or elaboration. Dr. Graf zu Trauttmansdorff, in his function as secretary general of the Europäische Akademie Schlüchtern56 (Hesse), began his letter to Churchill on 7 October 1948 as follows: Eure Excellenz! Auch in Deutschland hat sich die Erkenntnis durchgesetzt, dass nur ein Zusammenschluss der europäischen Nationen das Abendland und seine Kultur noch retten kann … [Your Excellence! The realization that only a federation of the European nations can save the Occident and its culture has penetrated Germany as well …] 57

54 ME 279, letter by Felix Kleiber, 12 August 1950, p. 2. 55 There is an interesting study by Dorowin, Hermann (1991): Retter des Abendlands: Kulturkritik im Vorfeld des europäischen Faschismus. Stuttgart. 56 The German weekly “Die Zeit” reported on the opening of the Akademie, No 45, 4 November 1948, https://www.zeit.de/1948/45/europaeische-akademie (accessed 13 September 2018). 57 ME 282, letter by Dr. Graf zu Trauttmansdorff, 7 October 1948, 1 page, typescript (original).

144

IV. “My Dear Mr. Churchill …”

To illustrate this point further, let us look at a letter to Dunstan Curtis by the displaced Sudeten German Ernst Glaser, written in Munich on 1 January 1948. Glaser had been a member of the Paneuropean Union from 1932 until the war. He states: “Das christliche Abendland kann nur durch ein geeintes Europa gerettet werden.” [The Christian Occident can only be saved by a united Europe.] 58 Here the Christian Occident is the actual entity of importance, Europe merely an instrument. This was a commonly held view not only in Germany: Henri Saget, resident of Meknès in Morocco, wrote to Churchill in Strasbourg on 18 August 1950: “La civilisation chrétienne est en danger. Vous devez la sauver en créant l’EUROPE.” [Christian civilization is in danger. You must save it and create EUROPE.]59 In English, he added “Federalist since 1920”. Other letter writers made do without the modifier “Christian”. Madeleine Noirel, a teacher of philosophy in Toulon, addressed Churchill along with several other signees on 16 August 1950, declaring that “A United Europe appears to us as the last wall for this Occidental civilisation in which we still wish to believe (…).”60 Others combined the two concepts: “(…) seule, l’Europe unie pourra sauver la Civilisation Occidentale Chrétienne.” [(…) only a united Europe is able to save the Christian Occidental Civilization.]61 The author of this phrasing, P. Dohet, signed with all his merits and fates: “Chevalier de la Légion d’Honneur, Croix de Guerre, Médaille de la Résistance, Combattant des deux guerres mondiales, Ancien Prisonnier de Guerre, Invalide de guerre, Sinistré total des Ardennes, Industriel réfugié à Parthenay”. Margarete Giese, a former staff member (1920–1945) of the Foreign Office in Berlin who had worked at the German embassy in Stockholm for many years and describes herself as an “insignificant employee”, writes the following: Sehr geehrter Herr Minister! Angesichts Ihres großen Werkes, welches Sie durch die Schaffung der “Vereinigten Staaten von Europa” zur Rettung des Abendlandes ins Leben rufen wollen, gestatte ich mir folgende Mitteilungen und Meinungen weiter Kreise vorzutragen. [Dear Mr. Minister! In view of your great effort that you wish to father through the creation of the “United States of Europe” for the rescue of the Occident, I take the liberty to present the following messages and opinions of wide circles.] 62

Among these “opinions”, Giese particularly emphasizes a common European currency. She refers explicitly to Coudenhove-Kalergi, whose initiatives she had followed during the interwar period, and mentions her current employment in the office of her brother Dr. Giese, a lawyer and notary public – and a Freemason: Da mein Bruder außerdem Freimaurer seit 1913 und Hochgradfreimaurer in höchstem Grade seit 1923 ist, tritt er und die Logenangehörigen für Völkerversöhnung und Zusammenschluss ein.

58 59 60 61 62

ME 281, letter by Ernst Glaser, handwritten, 1 January 1948, p. 2. ME 283, letter by Saget, 18 August 1950, 1 page, typescript. ME 283, letter by Madeleine Noirel et al., 16 August 1950, 2 pages, handwritten, here p. 1. ME 283, letter by P. Dohet, 14 August 1950. ME 281, letter by Margarete Giese, 20 May 1948, p. 1.

Priorities

145

[As my brother is also a Freemason since 1913 and a high-degree Freemason of the highest rank since 1923, he and the members of the Lodge advocate reconciliation of peoples and federation.]63

She ends her letter as follows: Bange Sorge um unseren so bedrohten Kontinent bestimmt mich, Ihnen durch dieses Exposé die Stimmung weiter Bevölkerungskreise zur Kenntnis zu bringen, die alle hoffen, daß Sie durch eine befreiende Tat zum wirklichen “Erretter Europas” werden. [Anxious worry about our so threatened continent forces me to bring to your attention through this exposé the mood of large parts of the population, all of which hope that you will become the true “saviour of Europe” by way of a liberating deed.]64

The correspondence of Margarete Giese comprises several other letters declaring the Soviet Union to be the primary threat. In one such letter to Churchill on 12 June 1949, she allows her fundamental race-ideological concept of culture or civilization to shine through very clearly: Werden die Westmächte den Kampf gegen Rußland’s asiatische Diplomatie gewinnen, denn Rußland ist jetzt wieder eine asiatische mongolische Großmacht geworden, die diplomatische Methoden anwendet, die der Diplomatie der Westmächte weit überlegen sind (…). Rußland hat dank der Hilfe der Westmächte Deutschland besiegt, ist Herr von Asien, dessen Grenzen jetzt an der Elbe liegen und will morgen “Herr der Welt” sein. Inoffiziell hat es den Kampf der weißen Rasse angesagt (…). Sobald die Russen in den Besitz der vollen Auswirkungen der Atombombe gelangen sollten, wird diese zur Entscheidung gegen die Westmächte und letzten Endes gegen die weiße Rasse angewandt werden. [Will the Western powers win the battle against Russia’s Asian diplomacy, for Russia has now once again become an Asian Mongolian great power applying diplomatic methods that are far superior to those of the Western powers (…). Thanks to the help of the Western powers, Russia has defeated Germany, is the master of Asia, whose borders are now along the Elbe and wishes to be “Master of the World” tomorrow. Unofficially it has declared war on the white race (…). As soon as the Russians shall come into possession of the full effects of the atomic bomb, it will be deployed for the purpose of decisive victory against the Western powers and eventually against the white race.]65

The letter ends with this appeal to Churchill: Sie, verehrter Herr Minister, (…), haben auch die Macht, den Dingen im Zeichen der Gefahr zu begegnen, indem Sie alle weißen Völker zu diesem, hoffentlich letzten Entscheidungskampfe vereinigen, um den asiatischen Horden Einhalt zu gebieten. Es handelt sich dabei nicht allein um Bestehen oder Untergang des Abendlandes, nein, die Herrschaft der weißen Rasse steht auf dem Spiel. Überall auf der Welt gährt es bei den Farbigen, die nur auf ein Zeichen von Moskau warten, um die Herrschaft der Weißen abzuschütteln. [You, honoured Mr. Minister, (…) also have the power to face things under the omen of this danger by uniting all white peoples for this hopefully last decisive battle to curb the Asian hordes. This is not about the existence or demise of the Occident, no, the rule of the white

63 Ibid., p. 3. 64 Ibid., p. 3. 65 ME 281, letter by Margarete Giese, 12 June 1946, p. 1.

146

IV. “My Dear Mr. Churchill …” race is at stake. Everywhere in the world the coloured peoples are waiting in the wings for a sign from Moscow to cast off the rule of the whites.] 66

References to the “white, strongest-willed Germanic-Nordic peoples” as well as to the “white master peoples” also appear in the text, with the United States of Europe heralded as their “rescue”. The “insignificant employee” had apparently fully internalized the racial ideology of the Nazis. Let us return to Ernst Glaser, the displaced Sudeten German. Enclosed with his letter mentioned above was a manuscript from the year 1937: “PaneuropaVortrag von Ernst Glaser, gehalten in der Prager Deutschen Sendung am 27. August 1937” [Pan-Europa speech by Ernst Glaser, given in the Prager Deutsche Sendung on 27 August 1937]. The following passage from this speech, which deals with the question of the conclusions to be drawn from the First World War, seems relevant: Europa wird zum Leben erwachen, nicht durch ein Netz politischer Bindungen und nicht durch ein System von Handelsverträgen, sondern durch den Glauben an die europäische Schicksalsgemeinschaft, an die europäische Seelengemeinschaft, an die europäische Kulturmission. [Europe will awaken to life, not through a net of political ties and not through a system of trade agreements, but through the belief in the European common destiny, in the European spiritual community, in the European cultural mission.] 67

This notion is concretized throughout the text up to the level of a global empire: Aus 26 Staaten soll ein Weltreich geschaffen werden, ein Weltreich, weit und stark genug, um mit Hilfe der modernen Technik das Elend der Völker zu brechen. Diese kühne und gewaltige Aufgabe steht vor uns; sie fordert Vertrauen in die Zukunft, sie fordert Glauben, sie fordert Tapferkeit. Denn das Europa, das wir erkämpfen, soll nicht nur eine politische und wirtschaftliche Gemeinschaft sein, sondern eine geistige: Die Steigerung und Erfüllung einer der herrlichsten Kulturen der Welt: Der Kultur der Persönlichkeit, der Menschlichkeit und der Ritterlichkeit – des Stolzes, der Liebe und der Ehre! [A world empire shall be created from 26 states, a world empire extensive and strong enough to break the misery of the peoples with the help of modern technology. This audacious and enormous task lies ahead of us; it demands trust in the future, it demands faith, it demands courage. For the Europe that we win shall be not only a political and economic community, but a mental one: The heightening and fulfilment of one of the most magnificent cultures in the world: The culture of character, of humaneness and of chivalrousness – of pride, of love and of honour!]68

The author’s system of values is clearly apparent in the text; democracy and justice as the foundations of the state are not mentioned, and only generic phrases on the need for peace and “European patriotism” are employed. The excess of 66 Ibid., p. 2. 67 ME 281, “Paneuropa-Vortrag von Ernst Glaser, gehalten in der Prager Deutschen Sendung am 27. August 1937”, typescript, 3 pages, here p. 2. 68 Ibid., p. 2–3.

Priorities

147

emotions displayed – as was common in many texts and speeches of the time – may help to better appreciate the rather more unemotional rationalism prevailing in the EU today. Emotions alone are not a sufficient basis for constructive politics. At any rate, Glaser’s thoughts matched the spirit of the Paneuropean Union well. That he enclosed his speech of 1937 in a letter written in 1948 indicates that he still considered his former deliberations relevant even after the Second World War. The personalism that Glaser’s text is infused with remained common among many Europeanists after 1945, as did the explicit and frequent mention of masculine values like “chivalrousness” and “honour”. The archive holdings also contain a collection of documents by and about the Dutchman Tjark Eltjo Bontkes, who wrote under the pseudonym Diderik Batavus and is briefly mentioned by A. P. A. M. van der Logt in the latter’s dissertation on Dutch National Socialists.69 Among the preserved items is a pamphlet entitled “Die Sendung Europas” (The Mission of Europe) and dated “Harzburg, den 22. Mai 1945”. The accompanying letters and documents are from 1949 and were sent to Churchill by the translator and author Rolf Haase, who worked in Badbergen near Osnabrück and had translated Bontkes’s writ from Dutch to German. The pamphlet comprises 44 single-spaced typed pages and follows the civilizational theory of “Volk und Boden”, claiming a global supremacy of European civilization from which the so-called European global mission results. This source can be viewed as evidence of the existence of “irreformable” and unreasonable persons who refused to engage with the question of the felonious consequences of a very specific theory of culture or civilization even after the war, preferring to maintain their agendas and believing that Churchill or the European Movement were suitable addresses. Certain views held by these people could nevertheless find comparatively broad acceptance – which does not make them any more proper, of course. Take for example the following ideas, quoted from Bontkes’s pamphlet: Die Kultur des Abendlandes hat in den letzten zweitausend Jahren sich zu einer einheitlichen Weltstellung emporgerungen. Es würde daher ein großes Vakuum entstehen, wenn das Abendland aufhörte, diese Weltstellung zu erfüllen. Besser würde es daher sein, den Sturz aufzuhalten und das europäische Gemeinschaftsleben wieder als ein nützliches Bindeglied im Weltganzen einzuschalten und es für seine Kulturmission zu erhalten. Der kulturelle Einfluß des Abendlandes auf die Weltgestaltung ist bis jetzt ein großer gewesen. Daraus geht hervor, daß im alten Europa sich Kräfte entwickelten, die vor allem auf geistig-schöpferischem Gebiet eine besondere Aufgabe erfüllen. Ohne dem wird die Welt schwerlich auskommen und etwas verlieren, das vielem Sinn und Farbe gegeben hat. Nun ist ja die Kultur des Abendlandes in den letzten Jahren krank gewesen. Sie hat sich nicht zu ihrer vollen Reife entfalten können; sie hat sich nach außen hin zu wenig als eine gestaltende Macht angemeldet und sich innerlich zu sehr zerspalten.

69 Logt, A. P. A. M. van der (2008): Het theater van de nieuwe orde. Een onderzoek naar het drama van Nederlandse nationaalsocialisten. Amsterdam (Ph.D. thesis, University of Amsterdam, http://hdl.handle.net/11245/1.299814), ch. 1, p. 47 et seq.

148

IV. “My Dear Mr. Churchill …” [The culture of the Occident has wrestled its way up to a uniform position in the world over the past two thousand years. A large vacuum would therefore be created if the Occident were to cease fulfilling this position. It would therefore be better to stop the decline and reinstate European communal life as a useful link in the totality of the world and preserve it for its cultural mission. The cultural influence of the Occident on the formation of the world has hitherto been a great one. This means that forces developed in the old Europe which fulfilled a special function in the intellectual and creative realm. Without it, the world will hardly get by and will lose something that lent meaning and colour to many areas. Now, the culture of the Occident has been sick in recent years. It has not been able to unfold to its full maturity; it has presented itself insufficiently as a formative force to the outside and has fissured too much internally.]70

Within the first roughly twenty years after the Second World War, we can find many voices sharing the same or similar views – despite not necessarily belonging to former Nazis, fascists, Pétainists or the like.71 It is not surprising that Bontkes’s concept left no space for thoughts concerning a democratic world order. Europe – Wiping the Slate Clean after the Vitiation The previously mentioned Hans-Georg Kemnitzer attached a manuscript for a speech to his letter to Winston Churchill on 26 February 1950. Kemnitzer was slated to speak before the Centre culturel français in Berlin on the subject “Deutschland und Frankreich im Lichte des europäischen Gedankens” [Germany and France in the light of the European idea]72 and wanted to be certain of being in line with Churchill’s convictions. He based his text entirely on the thought elaborated by Churchill in his speech in Zurich – which in turn referred to Gladstone – that one would have to be able to forget what had occurred (i.e. the Second World War) in order to build postwar Europe. Kemnitzer very much appreciated this notion of “wiping the slate clean”. He showed no interest in analysing the guilt or crimes of Germany, instead tending towards collectivization of the blame for what had happened by citing Georges Bernanos: “Nichts soll mich hindern, zu sagen, dass Deutschland nicht die Sünde Europas, sondern die der gesamten modernen Welt ist, die Sünde einer so tief verdorbenen Welt, dass die Völker, eins nach dem andern, daran verderben, und dass der letzte Dienst, der vom deutschen Volke der alten Zivilisation, die es einst hoch geehrt hatte, geleistet wurde, der ist, ihrer Schöpfung wie in einem ungeheuren Spiegel das Bild von dem zu zeigen, was sie, ohne es zu wissen, vielleicht morgen sein wird.” 70 ME 280, Diderik Batavus (pseudonym for Tjark Eltjo Bontkes): “Die Sendung Europas”, 1945, translated from Dutch to German by Rolf Haase (letter to Churchill, 10 August 1949), p. 6. 71 See Schmale, Wolfgang (2011): Before Self-Reflexivity: Imperialism and Colonialism in the Early Discourses of European Integration. In: Wintle, Michael J.; Spiering, Menno, eds.: European Identity and the Second World War. Houndmills – New York, p. 186–203. 72 ME 281, letter by Hans-Georg Kemnitzer, 26 February 1950, speech manuscript, 11 pages, typescript, single-spaced (carbon copy).

Priorities

149

[“Nothing shall prevent me from saying that Germany is not the sin of Europe but that of the entire modern world, the sin of a world corrupted so deeply that the peoples, one after the other, are spoiled by it, and that the last service provided by the German people to the old civilization that had once honoured it so highly is to have shown to its creation as if in an enormous mirror the image of what, without knowing it, it may be tomorrow.”] 73

The “clean slate” argument requires the argument of vitiation. A Europe of Democracy and Human Rights? From today’s point of view, the European Union is inseparable from democracy, human rights and the rule of law. This fact is defined in Article 2 of the “European Union Treaty” (Lisbon 2007) but was self-evident even before. As many letters reveal, however, a significant number of people had considerable difficulties combining both aspects in their thinking. It seems to have come the easiest for those with an “American” point of view. Several letter writers approached the topic of human rights especially from a German perspective, respectively from the perspective of the displaced. They complained that Germans and displaced persons were not being granted those rights; the Beskiden Germans even spoke of “crimes against humanity”. 74 Such approaches focusing only on the injustices suffered by their originators themselves could hardly lead to a constructive European dimension. The absence of the topic of democracy and human rights in many mailings to Churchill and/or his environment is striking. As is to be expected, however, each argumentation or elaboration is unique, and they cannot all be lumped together. The displaced Ernst Federmann wrote to Churchill from Hesse in the USoccupied zone on 1 March 1949: Unser schweres Leben unseres Schicksals hat uns gelehrt, dass eine sittliche Welt nur die Europäische Föderation erstehen lassen kann, wo die Menschenrechte wieder zur Geltung kommen können. Dieser Weg ist Gottes Heilplan in der Menschheit und in der Unordnung der Welt. Nur so kann eine Welt von Dauer werden. [Our hard life of our fate has taught us that an ethical world can only let the European Federation arise, where the human rights can once again come into their own. This path is God’s plan for salvation in humanity and in the disorder of the world. Only in this way can a world become permanent.]75

The starting point is the specific situation of the displaced person, but the approach to the human rights is religious – i.e. principal on the one hand, but not necessarily democratic on the other. 73 ME 281, draft speech by Hans-Georg Kemnitzer, 1950, quotation Bernanos, p. 1–2. Unlike other quotations in the speech, Kemnitzer did not cite the source in this case. 74 ME 281, resolution of the Beskiden German Landsmannschaft on 13 November 1949 (Meeting in Forchheim, Franconia), section “I. Feststellungen”, part B (p. 2). Sent to Churchill as “President of the United Europe Movement”, 26 November 1949. 75 ME 281, letter by Ernst Federmann, 1 March 1949, 1 page.

150

IV. “My Dear Mr. Churchill …”

Some German authors of letters attempted to derive consequences from the war crimes as well as from the experience of occupation. The previously cited Otto Lips from Miltenberg am Main began his 16-page single-spaced letter written on 16 November 1948 with a self-exculpation: Der Hass gegen den Kommunismus und das Grauen der S.U. wurde uns früh eingeprägt und war wohl für die meisten Deutschen das Ausschlaggebende, die Partei zu festigen, ohne dass sie damit Verbrechen gegen die Menschlichkeit und den Frieden gutgeheissen hätten. (…) Ich erkenne als grösste Fehler des 3. Reiches die Judenpolitik (die in so enorme Verbrechen ausartete), die Unterdrückung politischer Gegenmeinung (…). [The hate for Communism and the horror of the Soviet Union was impressed on us early on and was presumably the decisive impetus for most Germans to support the Party, even though this did not mean they approved of crimes against humanity and peace. (…) I recognize as the greatest mistakes of the Third Reich the Jewish policy (which degenerated into such enormous crimes), the suppression of politically opposite views (…).] 76

Lips subsequently places all of his hopes on Churchill: Ich weiss seine Politik für die echte Freiheit der Menschen und Staaten heute zu schätzen und meine, viele freie Menschen wünschen, dass der alte Winston der Weltpolitik noch lange erhalten bleibt. Ein europäischer Staatenbund ist von der Wirklichkeit noch weit entfernt, aber die Bemühungen der Vorbereitung einer Idee der Weltgemeinschaft allgemein sind anzuerkennen. [Today I appreciate his politics for the genuine freedom of persons and states and believe that many free men and women wish the old Winston to remain in global politics for a long time. A European federation of states is still far from reality, but the efforts for the preparation of an idea of the global community in general are to be acknowledged.] 77

He goes on to expand this thought even further, linking the idea of Europe with fundamental human rights definitions: Jedem Menschen sind das Recht auf Arbeit, die Freiheit und die Möglichkeit zur Entfaltung seines Glückes zu schaffen und zu erhalten. Es ist meine große Hoffnung, dass sich alle Völker in Zukunft achten können und werden, dass man sich als Europäer durch die Freundschaft in Warschau so wohl fühlen kann wie in Madrid, in Belgrad so wie in Oslo, in Athen so wie in Berlin und London, in Moskau so wie in Paris, in Lissabon so wie in Helsingfors usw. [For every man, the right to work, freedom and the opportunity to develop his happiness must be established and preserved. It is my great hope that all peoples can and will respect each other, that as a European one can feel as comfortable in Warsaw as in Madrid, in Belgrade as in Oslo, in Athens as in Berlin and London, in Moscow as in Paris, in Lisbon as in Helsinki etc.]78

Lips – an academic, professed Christian, husband and father, and Wehrmacht soldier during the war – may indeed be typical for many young men whose path in life was similar to his. They were people who made an effort to “learn from history”. It is impossible to determine from such letters whether their authors, beyond the fact that they were German soldiers, had been more deeply involved in 76 ME 279, letter by Otto Lips, 16 November 1948, p. 3–4. 77 ME 279, letter by Otto Lips, 16 November 1948, p. 10. 78 ME 279, letter by Otto Lips, 16 November 1948, p. 15.

Priorities

151

National Socialism. Lips’s vocabulary is that of Christian postwar Europeanism and bears no resemblance to that of the milieu seeking a “saviour of the Occident” during the interwar period. These German voices perceptibly lack democratic experience, and the thorough conception of a united Europe from the central democratic and human rights perspective is therefore not easy for them. In this, they are worlds apart from the letters sent to Churchill from the USA. Some of the persons writing from the United States mention having been born in Europe (Denmark, Germany, France, Greece, Austria) and can thus be assumed to have possessed a wellformed image of Europe, while their life in the USA seems to have enabled them to think about democracy regarding Europe in practical terms. The native Austrian Dr. Leo Dub phrased this aspect as follows in his plan for Europe prepared in the USA in 1943: It must be emphasized repeatedly to the European peoples that political power belongs to all and not to a small group. It will be a new revelation in Europe that a free citizen has inherent rights, that opinion, speech, and religion are not to be supressed, that no nation is better than another nation, and that the number of a nation’s people does not create special rights for the nation as a whole. Who in Europe today realizes that class hate, mass hate, and race hate are punishable crimes, that justice can be found before judges responsible only to law and their own consciousness, and that force does not create any right? The European Basic Principles will be the principles on which every democratic state is based.79

Chairman James N. Rosenberg and secretary general Willard Johnson of the United States Committee for a United Nations Genocide Convention wrote to T. B. Martin of the European Movement, London on 17 August 1948, inviting the Movement to support the draft for a genocide convention to be submitted to the United Nations General Assembly. The letter was a clear signal that the European Movement was expected to support the intended proscription and persecution of genocide. In the top left corner of the letter is the following handwritten assessment by Dunstan Curtis, to whom it was apparently forwarded: “I don’t think we should take an action – except if you think Allen Dulles being a vice chairman makes a difference. D. C.”80 The American authors had enclosed a list of organizations supporting the motion, among them several women’s associations: Mentioned first in the list is the Union Internationale des Ligues Féminines Catholiques (which is stated to represent 36 million female Catholics). Other women’s associations in the list include the Fédération Internationale des Amies de la Jeune Fille, the International Council of Women, the International Alliance of Women, the Associated Country Women of the World and the Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom. A number of American organizations follow, again including several women’s associations.

79 ME 282, Dr. Leo Dub (Brookline, MA): European Culture States Project, 1943, 11 printed pages plus 1 page of summary, p. 3. Dub introduces himself as a “former regimental surgeon, health officer, social hygiene society director, medical journal editor”. 80 ME 282.

152

IV. “My Dear Mr. Churchill …”

French letters regularly call for a European constitution. In his letter to Churchill on 12 August 1950, Yves Bot from Grasse describes the events during the États-généraux in Versailles on 20 June 1789: The representatives of the Third Estate, he claims, had sworn not to leave before they had given the kingdom a constitution, and the assembly of the Council of Europe in Strasbourg was to do the same. Mr. Bot feared that the affinity for democracy and the European idea in France and Germany would suffer greatly should the Council formulate only platonic resolutions.81 JP. [sic!] Spenle from Mulhouse wrote to Churchill on 22 August 1950, likewise requesting that the Council of Europe should not adjourn without having adopted a constitution for Europe. Spenle did not formulate concrete ideas for the contents of such a constitution, but the final appeal in his letter contains three keywords that are indicative of his democratic and human rights foundations: Nous sommes derrière vous, des millions qui veulent encore croire à la Liberté, à la Paix, au Respect de la personne humaine. [We are behind you, millions who still want to believe in Freedom, in Peace, in Respect for the human person.]82

There is an entire correspondence with a certain Gallus Hafen from St. Gallen, Switzerland preserved from the summer of 1947. Hafen introduces himself as a seventeen-year-old83 student of a higher education facility with a focus on mathematics. His phrasing is perhaps the most succinct of all: All European states would have to democratize, and a “United Europe” could help to do so. An economic community as a subsequent step would require democratized states, however. Hafen’s English was somewhat deficient, but that is not what counts – he made an effort and did the pro-European youth credit.84 Prof. Dr. José Cieker wrote to Churchill from Madrid to report on his personal contribution to a “free and democratic Europe”.85 What precisely was his contribution? Cieker wrote in Spanish although he was a Slovak, and he mentions articles he had written for “Arriba” – a journalistic central organ of dictator Franco. According to Johannes Großmann, Jozef Cieker was part of the “Conservative International”.86 81 ME 283, letter by Bot, 12 August 1950, 7 pages, handwritten, here p. 2. 82 ME 283, letter by Spenle, 22 August 1950, 2 pages, typescript, here p. 2. 83 So, Gallus must have been born in 1930: The Swiss newspaper “Tagblatt” reports (30 March 2012) the death (17 March 2012) of a certain Gallus Hafen, born in 1930 in St. Gallen, who has been a well known pediatrist in St. Gallen: https://www.tagblatt.ch/ostschweiz/stgallengossau-rorschach/einen-draht-zu-den-kindern-ld.309150. 84 ME 284, two letters by Gallus Hafen to Churchill, 25 May and 13 June 1947; attached an essay on “Briand oder Churchill”. 85 ME 286, letter by Jozef Cieker, 8 December 1948, 2 pages, typescript, here p. 2. 86 See Großmann, Johannes (2014): Die Internationale der Konservativen. Transnationale Elitenzirkel und private Außenpolitik in Westeuropa seit 1945. Munich, p. 89, 158. Großmann’s study is also interesting with regard to the postwar concept of “Abendland” and its agents, see chapter 1, “‘Abendland’ und ‘civilisation chrétienne’”, p. 45–94.

Priorities

153

Further voices came from Scandinavia. The businessman S. L. Aageness operating in Oslo transmitted two of his own deliberations on the subjects of a European federation, respectively a world federation, to Churchill in February 1947.87 He claimed to have written the former in 1939 and sent it to various governments, but the war had made it impossible to pursue the matter. The second treatise concerning the world federation was dated 1945. The entrepreneur had closed his business during the Second World War so as not to have to collaborate with the Germans. Aageness is occasionally mentioned in research on European unity endeavours, and Geneviève Duchenne links him to the Norwegian chapter of the Federal Union of Clarence Streit.88 Central to both his elaborations is the conviction that states had to be democratic in order to be able to co-operate. On this foundation it would be possible to achieve peace and prosperity in the European or world federation, while war destroyed all culture. The 1939 text is entitled “THE UNITED DEMOCRACIES OF EUROPE”, the one from 1945 “WAR ABOLISHED BY DEMOCRATIC WORLD FEDERATION!”. In Article 2 of the earlier document, Aageness stipulates: “All the states should be pledged to a democratic constitution with polling rights for all the people.” Within the same text, however, he adheres to the concept of colonies – a pattern we have encountered before in the chapters on the Freemasons and human rights leagues in the interwar period. For his definition of democracy in the 1945 text, Aageness refers to the American Declaration of Independence of 4 July 1776. The final correspondence to be mentioned here is that of Angelo Fornaro in Paris, who wrote a letter to Churchill on 12 February 1947 that takes us back to Churchill’s famous speech in Zurich.89 Enclosed with the letter are several documents of multiple pages each. Fornaro introduces himself as a long-time fighter for the European cause and claims to have made contact with Churchill as early as 1936. The attached papers are very interesting in that Fornaro deals extensively with Churchill’s Zurich speech of 1946 in them and disagrees with him repeatedly. Around the middle of his elaboration, he discusses aspects of a future European government that could be nothing other than democratic.90 Fornaro claims “democracy” to vary naturally from country to country, however, and before a truly European government could be established, a transformation phase would be required during which democracy in the individual states could develop.

87 ME 287, two letters by S. L. Aageness, 11 February and 14 March 1947. Two treatises: “The United Democracies of Europe”, 4 pages, typescript, dated 7 September 1939; “War Abolished By Democratic World Federation!”, typescript, dated 1945. 88 See Duchenne, Esquisse d’une Europe nouvelle, op. cit., p. 114, footnote 522. 89 ME 637. 90 ME 637, Angelo Fornaro: “Futurs Etats-Unis d’Europe?” (dated September 1946), typescript, here p. 6.

154

IV. “My Dear Mr. Churchill …”

Fornaro underlines how important it is to determine functionaries by way of elections. He uses the French constitution (of the Fourth Republic) as a model for his envisioned European government, albeit restricting himself mostly to the basic offices and institutions: president, prime minister and council of ministers, legislative assembly. In regard to the latter, he does not specify whether it should be elected directly by the citizens. Here too, the decisive principle of democracy is not discussed in great depth. CONCLUSION A “Europe of democracy and human rights” is not in the foreground among the analysed letters. Although several of them feature enclosed treatises, the latter were not generally used for detailed elaborations on democracy and human rights – or at least no more than the actual letters themselves. “Human rights” are touched upon even less frequently than “democracy”. Personal experience, often as an emigrant, with the French or American democratic systems seems to have had a positive effect in this regard, facilitating the discussion of a united Europe from the perspective of democracy and human rights. As the small number of preserved letters prevents us from assuming true representativeness, we must be wary of generalizations. That being said, the topic of European civilization and its preservation through European unity is encountered far more regularly than those of democracy and human rights, and this allows us to presume an order of priorities in which the latter issues likely did not top the list. Entirely indisputable, however, is the high emotional value of the idea of a united Europe – and specifically a United States of Europe. Finally, it is clear that a great many of these letters were written by people who came from the political and ideological environment that had just pushed Europe to the brink of ruin. These people were attracted by Churchill’s declared anti-Bolshevism. We cannot assume that the desire for European unification they expressed in their letters was not “honest”, however, even when – as in the cases of Margarete Giese and Jozef Cieker – their own rootedness in fascist thinking and ideas is only marginally disguised. The concepts behind keywords such as “United States of Europe”, “European Union”, “united Europe” and the like were as different as their proponents.

EPILOGUE I intentionally made a slightly offensive statement at the beginning of this book, namely that – historically speaking – the idea of a united Europe or a United States of Europe had many mothers and fathers beyond the handful of well-known statesmen like De Gaulle, Adenauer and others to whom the European Union refers with a certain exclusivity at ceremonial occasions. The best answer to this misrepresentation would surely be a full historical overview of pro-European civil society initiatives and activities: First attempts can be traced back to the late eighteenth century, when the foundation of the United States of America worked as a role model or paragon of sorts for Europe. The existence of the democratically constituted USA was viewed as proof that democracy as a form of government could work not only at the small scale of a city republic like Geneva but at a grand scale as well, and authors who achieved fame during their lifetime, like Alexis de Tocqueville, shaped their times by engaging with this realization. By the first half of the nineteenth century, during the German Vormärz period and in the run-up to the revolutions of 1830 and 1848 in general, “United States of Europe” were a subject of debate under various names – not among the monarchs but among the revolutionaries, the democrats and the fighters for freedom as well as among the less radical forces like the Liberals.1 With the pacifist movement that developed surrounding the revolutions of 1848, the idea of a United States of Europe experienced a boom in popularity. Throughout the following decades and on beyond the First World War, ever more people became enthusiastic about the concept, and many joined of one or more civil society organizations. This trend continued between the wars, with the number of NGOs growing almost exponentially. They were closely linked through the many individuals who were members of multiple organizations, and various international umbrella organizations were also established. At this point at the latest, we are faced with a massive and convoluted field of research, and full reception of the wealth of its results appears practically impossible. This applies even more in regard to the resistance movements and exile groups during the Second World War, the quickly multiplying and fast-growing pro-European movements immediately following it, and to the Europeanism of the major political party formations (Socialists/Social Democrats; Christian Democrats/People’s Parties; Liberals; later “Greens” or

1

See e.g. Brendel, Thomas (2005): Zukunft Europa? Das Europabild und die Idee der internationalen Solidarität bei den deutschen Liberalen im Vormärz (1815–1848). Bochum. Ries, Klaus, ed. (2016): Europa im Vormärz. Eine transnationale Spurensuche. Ostfildern (with a very substantial introduction by Ries).

156

Epilogue

ecologically-oriented parties)2 – not to mention the countless professional and occupational associations organized at the European (and often even international) level. New aspects are constantly being “discovered”, or at least appreciated and comprehensively discussed for the first time, in all these areas.3 In short, there is a massive amount of available information – yet significant gaps and desiderata remain. I hope that this book and its three case studies have been able to contribute to closing some of these gaps. Perhaps at some point in the future, a comprehensive overview will be possible. As mentioned in the introduction, I do not consider it constructive to characterize every NGO as being part of civil society. It makes more sense in my eyes – with a view to the origins of NGOs in the late eighteenth century, like the abolition associations – to link the term “civil society” to a commitment to fundamental and human rights on the basis of a humanitarian stance and to the associations or organizations with transnational or international membership founded for that purpose. As a result of further developments, we can add to these criteria the dedication to gender equality and the rejection of a nationalism oriented towards autarky and authoritarianism, to be replaced by the goal of creating a united Europe – as a union of fraternal national states or in another form. In the twentieth century, these goals were supplemented with the striving for democracy. This definition excludes nationalistic, authoritarian-conservative, fascist and similar organizations, even if they are formally NGOs. At the individual level, as we have seen, a certain rootedness in such ideas can occasionally be found. Similarly, NGOs cannot be completely separated from governments and government officers, since their individual members can – and should – in part be members of governments and their agencies, parliaments, committees and the like, thereby representing essential bridges between NGOs and governing bodies. Because the research on associations and organizations that supported one of the various notions of a united Europe is broad but nevertheless still features large gaps, two civil society organizations advocating a democratic united Europe were examined for this book: the Freemasons and the Leagues for Human Rights. They were also chosen, however, because they had relatively large memberships, regularly engaged in structured debates and valued the principle of independent continuous education. Even the 6,000 members of the Paneuropean Union across

2

3

There is a host of research on the Europeanism of political parties representing these fundamental ideological orientations; see e.g. Bonfreschi, Lucia; Orsina, Giovanni; Varsori, Antonio, eds. (2015): European Parties and the European Integration Process, 1945–1992. Brussels. Christian Democrat parties seem to be the best studied: Durand, Jean-Dominique, ed. (2013): Christian Democrat Internationalism. Its Action in Europe and Worldwide from post World War II until the 1990s, 2 vols. Brussels. It would be impossible to provide an exhaustive bibliography; by way of example, I will cite Christoph Ploß’s thesis on the New Commonwealth Society, which is not unknown to research but has hitherto not been properly appreciated: Ploß, Christoph Johannes (2017): Die “New Commonwealth Society”. Ein Ideen-Laboratorium für den supranationalen europäischen Integrationsprozess. Stuttgart.

Epilogue

157

the continent appear quite modest compared to the several hundred thousand Freemasons and activists in the human rights leagues. Only the pacifist movements and associations reached similar membership numbers, though of course many of their members were also members in a human rights league or Masonic lodge. One should also not assume that all of these hundreds of thousands of people were truly “active”; had they been, who knows what turn history might have taken. Or not. The two case studies in this book thus deal with comparatively large organizations, while the majority of previous research on pro-European NGOs has been dedicated to smaller units or specific circles of “insiders”. The situation is different for the postwar era, as the pro-European movements initially created a like-minded “mass base” (to be taken with a grain of salt) that extended directly into the parliaments, parties and governments of the free countries. These were essentially the six founding countries of the ECSC and the EEC plus the United Kingdom. The Scandinavian countries were more loosely connected, being initially engaged in proprietary, Scandinavia-oriented initiatives that had their roots in the Second World War (“United States of the North”4). The case studies deal with the question of what the large membership of the Freemasons and human rights leagues (the latter sometimes being small, but at least federated in the LIDH) could effectuate in practice. This question cannot be definitively answered, since many planes of activity within the hierarchical structures, from the local sphere of action up to the international scope, would have to be investigated for every single member. This can be done relatively easily for small European insider circles, but the effort required for an association with thousands of members is enormous. Further research is needed in this regard. Due to their size, their interconnectedness and their organization, the Masons and Leagues for Human Rights in the interwar period are suitable door openers for gaining insight into the civil society of the period with regard to the connection of the idea of Europe with the concepts of human rights and democracy. These contexts of argumentation in which the idea of a united Europe was linked to democracy and human rights can be reconstructed quite easily. Making the connection was a difficult process, however: On the one hand, there were considerable differences of opinion within each of the mentioned organizations, and on the other, the concepts of democracy and human rights had not yet been fully elaborated or even thought out. While women’s suffrage was no longer a matter of contention among ligueurs and Freemasons – at least among the more secular and progressive ones – the touchstone of colonialism shows that there were still significant difficulties in applying these values uniformly. Viewing democracy as an indiscriminate concept would have meant explicitly disapproving of colonialism. Some certainly did so, but the mainstream was still caught up in the notion of hegemonic European civilization, which stood in the way of anti-colonialism in this regard. 4

See Hecker-Stampehl, Jan (2011): Vereinigte Staaten des Nordens. Integrationsideen in Nordeuropa im Zweiten Weltkrieg. Munich – Berlin.

158

Epilogue

Hence a united Europe or United States of Europe were always conceived as a Eurocentric entity even though the League of Nations, which extended beyond Europe, represented an important dimension in most people’s deliberations. The League of Nations associations that had been established were well-connected to other associations and organizations, but they were not necessarily clearly separated from governmental entities. The relative lack of success of all endeavours during the 1930s was not a result of insufficient networking, but that of the increasing pressure of dictatorships in Europe, of increasing persecution, and of the individual’s increasing struggle for existence. The entire spectrum of conceptions of Europe that had been discussed during the interwar period survived the Second World War. Instead of going over all of the resistance groups’ notions of Europe and then continuing on to the proEuropean movements – both approaches that have already been followed multiple times in research – I decided on a new perspective in regard to the years immediately following the Second World War for this book, namely that of the letters received by Winston S. Churchill and his European Movement between 1946 and 1951. These letters were sent from various locations in the Western world including South America, but not from Eastern Europe. Native Eastern European letter writers did exist, but all of them lived in exile somewhere in the West. As random as the composition of this group of letter writers is due to the fragmentary tradition of their texts, they nevertheless illustrate quite well the “generation”5 that represented the field of recruitment for the European movements established in the years after the war. Among the authors were school children, students, former soldiers, working women, socially and societally engaged women, older employed men and entrepreneurs, former followers of the authoritarian or fascist rulers, displaced persons, emigrants, immigrants, etc. Like the Freemasons and human rights activists between the wars, these people and their letters constituted door openers. They cultivated the fields that were to feed the pro-European movements. The motivation for most of the letters kept by the European Movement were Churchill’s speeches on a united Europe; his words at the University of Zurich on 19 September 1946 in particular prompted many men and women to write to him concerning Europe. The flow of mail seems to have abated after Churchill became prime minister of Great Britain once more in October 1951. The authors of the letters in part form a bridge back to the interwar period, since many of them claimed – and in some cases were able to substantiate these claims with documents – to have already been interested in or active on behalf of a united Europe after the First World War. Others were apparently mobilized because they had been incited by Churchill and believed that he could “make Europe”. Some of the writers came from very conservative or even fascist or National Socialist milieus, and they usually carried over a not entirely “softened” version of the corresponding propaganda into the postwar years. Of course there 5

I use the term “generation” only symbolically and with no intent of joining the discussion on “generation” as a theory.

Epilogue

159

were also those who reflected self-critically on their own actions and hoped to contribute to building the new, democratic Europe. Since some of the members of this coincidental group of contemporary witnesses wished to join their local section of the European Movement or had already done so, the resulting overall picture is surely not representative, but at the same time certainly not entirely uncharacteristic of the men and women who formed the base of the early European Movement after the Second World War. To a degree, the letters also provide insight into which texts and discourses on Europe had been received. The greatest penetration was doubtless achieved by Count Coudenhove-Kalergi, but he was unable to take advantage of this in the years after the war. Victor Hugo, Oswald Spengler and others are cited or mentioned, but what use were they in terms of content after 1945? Victor Hugo’s emotional appeal to the fraternal nations to establish a peaceful Europe fit the moment and served as an emotional vehicle. Spengler’s “Decline of the West” likewise appears reduced to its emotional component contained in or triggered by its title, which was succinct and seemed to describe accurately the hardships, the devastation and the ever-increasing knowledge of the monstrosities committed during the war. The letters do not engage with Spengler’s theories and ideas in any detail, however. Overall, democracy and human rights are not among the topics of high priority discussed in the letters and enclosed lengthier elaborations – particularly in those from Germany. The work on democratizing Europe was mostly still in its infancy. When comparing ordinary civil society in the shape of the Freemasons and human rights leagues to the authors of the examined letters, it becomes clear that the organizations recognized and emphasized the connections between a project like the establishment of a United States of Europe, civilization, democracy and human rights more clearly. This has to do with the fact that in their case, many people were involved in developing a discourse. The writers of letters to Churchill (or to the European Movement) were by no means outside of such discursive contexts by definition, but even in the most extensive letters and longest treatises analysed for this book, the four mentioned central discursive fields are rarely considered in detail together. As heterogeneous as the letters are, their examination nevertheless shows that it would surely be worth investigating more intensively those people who were already deliberating the idea of a united Europe on the basis of various concepts during the interwar period. The resistance movements represent the best-known environment bringing together men and women who had already been working for a united Europe before the war – or at least began doing so within the resistance – and later re-engaged in such activities after it had ended. Some of these persons, like Altiero Spinelli, became successful European politicians. Several persecuted people who had survived incarceration in concentration camps would also go on to become politicians on the European stage – an example is Simone Veil. The human rights leagues that were gradually forced to discontinue their work before or during the Second World War – the French LDH operated until

160

Epilogue

1939/40 – resumed their work in the West thereafter, albeit under often difficult and chaotic circumstances, as investigated e.g. by Lora Wildenthal for the German league.6 In view of the still very patchy research on the postwar Leagues of Human Rights, one has to be cautious with hypotheses, but there is an undeniable impression that the pro-European agenda no longer had the significance it had possessed before the war. This development began as early as during the 1930s and was owed to the proliferation of dictatorships. Other factors also played a role in regard to the postwar period and the orientation of the human rights leagues during that time: Europe in particular was quick to secure and expand the legal and juridical protection of the human rights, and international human rights protection efforts increased as well, causing the “old” leagues as well as newer organizations like Amnesty International to orient themselves toward the modern form of human rights activism that has remained the standard to this day. Simultaneously, Europe was being “made” – or at least dynamics were developing that would eventually lead to the establishment of the Council of Europe, the ECSC and various other European and international institutions. Finally, the European Movements had been or were being founded – one could say that the concern of European unity, in whichever formal shape it would assume, was now in the hands of others. Most Masonic lodges were likewise forced to start anew in 1945. Determining the extent of their involvement with Europe would require large-scale systematic analysis and research going beyond individual pieces of evidence as provided in this book. People like the writers of letters to Churchill had very different philosophies and convictions, thus establishing a highly varied continuity between the interwar and postwar periods. One result of the study of these letters is certainly that they are somewhat disillusioning in regard to their contents, especially concerning democracy and human rights. On the other hand, they provide excellent evidence of the emotional impetus that existed during the early postwar years and presumably would have allowed politics to take bigger and faster steps and go further than they actually did. The letters expressing disappointment in the Council of Europe show this very clearly. Due to the definition of civil society in regard to associations and organizations on which I have based this study, not all of the writers of the examined letters can be considered individual representatives of civil society. Anyone appealing to Winston Churchill to save the “white race” is clearly outside of what can be reasonably be described as civil society. “Civil society” thus represents a concept allowing a certain selectivity in the study of the innumerable pro-European initiatives in the twentieth century, but also in the present circumstances. The scientific question whether we can truly speak of a “European civil society” existing in the first half of the twentieth centu6

Wildenthal, Lora (2017): The Reincarnations of the German League for Human Rights in Occupied and West Germany. In: Schmale/Treiblmayr, eds., Human Rights Leagues, op. cit., p. 95–121.

Epilogue

161

ry remains unanswered – even now, in the second decade of the twenty-first century, the answer is by no means self-evident. The problem in this context is not lack of interconnectedness, which was present and effective throughout the entire twentieth century. Rather, the problem are the common foundations and goals. In this regard, the interwar period may even have offered better conditions for a “European civil society” in terms of the history of ideas: As we have seen in the case of the embedment of Freemasons and human rights leagues in the European context, the “French prism” played a decisive role. Owing to its roots in the Enlightenment7 and the French Revolution, the French “version” of civilization lent itself exceptionally well to being linked to the idea of a United States of Europe, to the engagement with human rights and the realization of democracy. One might argue that this was a consensus of the elites, of course. The counterargument is that intensive debates on the meaning of civilization itself were going on at the time. That is why I have investigated the notion of “elite” in the case study on the LIDH using the same sources as for the examination of other conceptions of Europe; it is also why I have attempted to determine – in all three case studies – who the individual agents participating in the discourses were. Once again, it is the letters that prove that “civilization” was an actively used term even though its meaning often remained diffuse. Nevertheless, the oft-used notion of the “West” or “Occident” was in part simply imbued with educated middleclass figures of thought. In their modern-day usage, terms like “Leitkultur” or the “Christian West” are often empty and meaningless testaments to a certain impoverishment of thinking. This was not the case in the first years after the Second World War – an assessment not to be understood as approval or rejection of concrete contents of the notions of culture or civilization used in the examined sources. The crisis of the European Union and the anti-European attacks by right-wing populists and extremists in recent years have led to the establishment of new associations and movements advocating the union of Europe or the European Union specifically. Claus Leggewie has provided an overview of these organizations.8 It is much easier now to form transnational networks and collaborate across borders than it was in the first half of the twentieth century. The intention of this archive study was to investigate the breadth and significance of civil society for the idea of European union during the first half of the twentieth century up until the establishment of official European institutions after 1945. The first among the possible conclusions to be drawn for the present from this historical analysis is probably that the foundations of a European debate in terms of content must once again be broadened. It is currently far too restricted to potential institutional reforms within the EU and individual political projects like co-operation in the area of defence.

7 8

See Schmale, Legacy of the Enlightenment, op. cit. Leggewie, Europa zuerst!, op. cit.

162

Epilogue

These topics are no doubt important as well, but they are not sufficient; in principle, we almost seem to be going in circles with a view to the debates in the interwar period, in the resistance and during the early postwar years. Like the members of the LIDH discussed the notion that only a democratic Europe could form a United States of Europe, we must now – having principally achieved a democratic Europe, although we also need to continually secure it anew – discuss the “democratization of democracy” and of the European institutions in particular. The analysed sources show the significance of the concept of civilization. In the letters, it is Eurocentric, colonialistic and heavily influenced by the French paradigm, but the often extensive elaborations of Masonic lodges and their members in particular prove that much substance existed and was incorporated into the debate on Europe. Some of the contents are not only outdated today, like the general stance on colonialism and its presumptive mission of spreading civilization, but have in fact become an object of intensive scientific as well as political self-criticism: French President Emmanuel Macron referred to colonialism as a “crime against humanity” in an Algerian radio broadcast on 15 February 2017.9 But to what degree are the Europeans of today capable of engaging in a substantive debate about “European civilization” – regardless of what the concrete positions in such a debate would be? To reiterate, “Leitkultur”, the “Christian West” or the “European way of life” are nowadays devoid of meaning and pure political propaganda terms designed to exclude certain groups of people from society – the exact opposite of what the debates on civilization within civil society (keeping in mind the definition used in this book!) during the interwar period were striving to achieve. Over the course of 1948 at the latest, the issues of democracy and human rights came into focus. The very first part of the Political Resolution of the Congress of Europe in The Hague in May 1948 states the following: [The Congress] 5. Assigns to a United Europe the immediate task of establishing progressively a democratic social system, the aim of which shall be to free men from all types of slavery and economic insecurity, just as political democracy aims at protecting them against the exercise of arbitrary power.10

On 10 December 1948, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was passed by the United Nations, and the International Council of the European Movement convened in Brussels on 25–28 February 1949, combining democracy and the human rights charter in its “Conclusions”. The Council of Europe assembled for

9

See e.g. “Le Monde”, 16 February 2017: https://www.lemonde.fr/election-presidentielle2017/video/2017/02/16/colonisation-et-crime-contre-l-humanite-ce-qu-a-dit-emmanuelmacron_5080728_4854003.html (accessed 18 September 2018). 10 The Hague Congress, Political Resolution, complete text, reproduced in Boyd, Andres; Boyd, Frances (1949): Western Union. A Study of the Trend toward European Unity. Washington, p. 159–164, here p. 159–160.

Epilogue

163

the first time from 8 August to 9 September 1949 (in Strasbourg), debating the European Convention on Human Rights starting on 19 August.11 In this context, let us recall the cited or mentioned letters and postcards cheering on Churchill during this first Council meeting – or voicing disappointment over the fact that the opportunity to “make” Europe had not been seized. But if we also remember that European unity, democracy and human rights had been deliberated in their mutual conditionality since between the wars, the achievement of the new Council of Europe seems by no means insignificant. It was, after all, the first time that the nature of this interconnectedness had been genuinely concretized. Human rights and democracy as basic conditions for peace also increasingly came into the focus of the peace movements after the Second World War, as a comprehensive analysis of the awardees of the Nobel Prize for Peace has shown.12 Overall, one can safely say that the fundamental significance of democracy and human rights for major concerns and goals like European unification, international relations, peace and prosperity has been beyond all doubt since 1945. In principle, this applies not only to the West, for both issues also played an important role in the conception of the socialist constitutions. The interpretation of democracy and human rights was different – and their practice even more so – but this did not prevent the expansion of our understanding on human rights and democracy in the context of the United Nations, for example. The Treaty on the European Union stipulates disregard for democracy, the rule of law, human rights and the associated fundamental values as reasons for expulsion from the Union. At the time of this writing, corresponding proceedings have been initiated against Poland and Hungary. They will likely not end with the expulsion of the two countries, but the instrument as such and the commencement of the proceedings are historically noteworthy. In general terms, this constitutes another baton change of sorts: While the safeguarding of democracy and human rights cannot be achieved without society – nor without civil society – it is now also part of the responsibility of the joint European institutions.

11 This Convention and the historical contexts are critically debated by present ‘revisionist’ human rights’ historiography. See the overview by Pasture, Patrick (2018): The Invention of European Human Rights. In: History. The Journal of the Historical Association, vol. 103, No 356, p. 485–504. 12 See Bader-Zaar, Birgitta; Diendorfer, Gertraud; Reitmair-Juárez, Susanne, eds. (2017): Friedenskonzepte im Wandel. Analyse der Vergabe des Friedensnobelpreises von 1901 bis 2016. Innsbruck, p. 9, p. 13; part 1, passim.

SUMMARIES DEUTSCH Die europäische Integration war nicht die Sache „einiger weniger“, wie es gerne in offiziellen EU-Dokumenten und bei Politiker*innen heißt, sondern sie wurde in der Zwischenkriegszeit, im Widerstand im Zweiten Weltkrieg und in den Europäischen Bewegungen der Nachkriegszeit breit zivilgesellschaftlich vorbereitet. Derzeit mehren sich Studien zu „Europa von unten“; insoweit liefert die hier vorgelegte Forschung die Vorgeschichte zum Heute. Die erfolgreiche Institutionalisierung der Europäischen Integration ab den 1950er-Jahren hat die zivilgesellschaftlichen Akteure bis zu einem gewissen Grad marginalisiert, nachdem sie die Idee demokratischer Vereinigter Staaten von Europa seit dem ausgehenden 19. Jahrhundert bis in die 1950er-Jahre entscheidend entwickelt und vorangebracht hatten. Im Mittelpunkt der Studie stehen die Initiativen von Freimaurer*innen und Menschenrechtsaktivist*innen in der Zwischenkriegszeit, die häufig unter dem Schlagwort der „Vereinigten Staaten von Europa“ dem Aufbau eines demokratischen und geeinten Europa galten. Dies wurde in der Forschung bisher nicht weiter untersucht, obwohl beide Richtungen Säulen und Vernetzungsknoten der Zivilgesellschaft der Zwischenkriegszeit darstellten. Sie vernetzten zu Völkerbundvereinigungen, feministischen Vereinen, Antirassismusligen und anderen NGOs. Freimaurer*innen und Menschenrechtsaktivist*innen stellen infolgedessen kein beliebiges Untersuchungsfeld dar, sondern können als repräsentativ für eine bisher ausstehende tiefgreifende Untersuchung der europäischen Zivilgesellschaft der Zwischenkriegszeit stehen. Der Begriff der Zivilgesellschaft wird in diesem Buch eng mit der gesellschaftlichen Entwicklung von Demokratie seit dem ausgehenden 18. Jahrhundert, als die ersten „NGOs“ wie beispielsweise die Antisklaverei- und ab ca. 1815 die Friedensvereine entstanden und versuchten, dem demokratiepolitisch defizitären Handeln der Staaten entgegenzuwirken, das auch für die im Zuge der Atlantischen Revolution entstandenen revolutionären Staaten (USA, Erste Republik in Frankreich) charakteristisch war. Die Menschenrechtsligen, in denen die Menschenrechtsaktivist*innen tätig waren, wurden oft von Freimaurer*innen gegründet, zumindest waren solche oft maßgeblich beteiligt. Daher rührt der im Buchtitel angesprochene Zusammenhang der beiden Richtungen, die sowohl nationale wie europäische bzw. internationale Organisationsstrukturen aufweisen. Für beide war der Bezug auf 1789 – das heißt die Menschen- und Bürgerrechtserklärung – äußerst wichtig. Im Zuge der Archivforschungen stellte sich heraus, dass „Europäische Einheit“ bzw. eben oftmals „Vereinigte Staaten von Europa“ sowohl bei Freimau-

166

Summaries

rer*innen wie Menschenrechtsaktivist*innen ein Kernthema waren, das, der Grundeinstellung dieser Richtungen folgend, eng mit Demokratie und Menschenrechten verbunden wurde. Das Thema führte zudem regelmäßig zu Debatten über den Kolonialismus und über Zivilisation. Beide Richtungen sind Teil der europäischen und nationalen Zivilgesellschaften der Zwischenkriegszeit. Allerdings war Frankreich die Drehscheibe beider Richtungen wie auch der europäischen Zivilgesellschaft. Dies war so teils aus historischen Gründen, da Frankreichs Zivilisation nach eigenem Verständnis das Beste Europas ausmachte und Frankreich eine Zivilisationsmission erfüllte – und damit nachweislich viele Zeitgenoss*innen überzeugte, die sich an Frankreich als „Leitkultur“ orientierten. Teils war dies so aus pragmatischen Gründen, weil, beginnend mit Italien als erstem faschistischem Land im Europa nach dem Ersten Weltkrieg, Freimaurer*innen und Menschenrechtsaktivist*innen wie viele andere auch aufgrund ihrer liberalen, konsequent demokratischen Einstellungen verfolgt wurden und zunehmend in Frankreich Asyl und eine Wirkungsstätte suchten. Was die Menschenrechtsligen angeht, hatte der 1922 gegründete internationale Verband (LIDH oder FIDH – Ligue internationale des Droits de l’Homme oder Fédération internationale des Ligues des Droits de l’Homme) seinen Sitz in Paris, in den Räumlichkeiten der französischen Liga. Von Anfang an hielten sich die verfolgten italienischen Ligueurs in Frankreich auf und hatten auch zahlenmäßiges Gewicht. Von den etwas über 30 Ligen in der Zwischenkriegszeit arbeiteten die meisten Exilligen in Paris bzw. Frankreich. In der Studie steht die LIDH/FIDH im Mittelpunkt und damit der europäische Verbund, in dem auch einzelne Mitgliedsverbände aus Ostmitteleuropa, vom Balkan über Österreich und die Tschechoslowakei bis Frankreich und Spanien Profil bekommen, die aber eben oft nicht eindeutig von den Aktivitäten der französischen Mutter-Liga getrennt ist. Das Archiv der LIDH/FIDH befindet sich in der BDIC, Bibliothèque de documentation internationale contemporaine, Paris-Nanterre, die mittlerweile den Namen „La Contemporaine. Bibliothèque, Archives, Musée des mondes contemporains“ trägt. Die LIDH/FIDH-Akten waren von der Gestapo beschlagnahmt worden, waren Ende des Krieges in die Hände der Roten Armee gefallen und wurden dann in einem Geheimarchiv in Moskau untergebracht, von wo sie Anfang der 2000erJahre zurück nach Frankreich kamen. Die spezifische europäische Funktion Frankreichs bedingt im Buch eine Schwerpunktsetzung mit Frankreich, die sich aber aus der Sache ergibt. Die Freimaurer*innen kommen über die enge Verbindung mit den Menschenrechtsligen in den Fokus. Die Studie startet mit europäischen Perspektiven, kommt dann aber zu einer französischen Fallstudie, der Grande Loge de France, deren Archiv inklusive der aus dem Moskauer Geheimarchiv zurückgebrachten Archivanteile benutzt werden konnte. Die Bedeutung des Themas Europa war überraschend groß und ist bisher in der Forschung zu Freimaurern so gut wie nicht untersucht worden. Dasselbe gilt in Bezug auf das Europa-Engagement der Menschenrechtsligen. Eine solche Fallstudie schlägt zudem mit Blick auf die internationale Freimaurerforschung auch einen neuen Weg ein, indem hier Europa

Deutsch

167

bzw. „Vereinigte Staaten von Europa“ als Interessensgebiet der Logen thematisiert wird. Es handelt sich nicht um Randphänomene: Die französische Menschenrechtsliga hatte zu Beginn der 1930er-Jahre ca. 180.000 Mitglieder, andere Ligen waren kleiner oder ganz klein, aber deshalb nicht wirkungs- oder bedeutungslos. Freimaurer*innen gab es in Europa in der Zeit ca. eine halbe Million – wobei nicht alle Interesse am Europathema, nicht einmal an der Demokratie hatten – ein Teil aber eben schon. Das Buch geht dabei nicht zuletzt der Frage nach, wie Inhalte entstanden und wie sie disseminiert wurden. Kamen sie in den Mitgliederorganisationen auch ‚von unten‘? Der Studie liegt außerdem eine Genderperspektive zugrunde. Freimaurerlogen waren im Prinzip Männerbünde, aber es gab gemischte Logen. In den Menschenrechtsligen mag die Mehrzahl der Mitglieder männlich gewesen sein, Frauen spielten jedoch vielfach eine zentrale Rolle. So wurde die LIDH/FIDH in der Zwischenkriegszeit von Generalsekretärinnen gemanagt: Aline Ménard-Dorian und Milly Zirker. Frauenrechte waren ein zentrales Thema. Die Studie eröffnet folglich ein interessantes Forschungsfeld und verändert ein Stück weit die traditionelle Forschung zur Geschichte der Idee von den „Vereinigten Staaten von Europa“. Perspektivisch kommt es darauf an, noch mehr als bisher diese Forschung auf die Zivilgesellschaft auszudehnen, die in der Zwischenkriegszeit hohes Interesse beanspruchen kann. Der Schwerpunkt der Studie wird durch die Zwischenkriegszeit gebildet, doch gibt es Verbindungen in den Zweiten Weltkrieg und in die erste Nachkriegszeit. Was den Zweiten Weltkrieg angeht, waren es besonders Widerstandsbewegungen und -gruppen, die jedoch einigermaßen gut erforscht sind. In den ersten Nachkriegsjahren entfalteten Winston Churchills Reden (Churchill war Freimaurer) zum Thema der „Vereinigten Staaten von Europa“ große Wirkung. Sie wurden über viele Medien verbreitet und erreichten auch ‚einfache‘ Bürger*innen. Davon zeugen unter anderem einige Hundert überlieferte Briefe an Churchill von individuellen Schreiber*innen aus einer größeren Zahl von Ländern, die sich im Bestand der „Europäischen Bewegung“ im Archiv der EU am European University Institute in Florenz erhalten haben und die im vorliegenden Buch ausgewertet werden. Die Briefe gehören zu dem „grassroots-Europa“ der ersten Nachkriegsjahre. Die Briefautor*innen waren teilweise bereits in der Zwischenkriegszeit Europaaktivist*innen gewesen, andere kamen über Churchills Reden dazu, wieder andere hatten die faschistische und nationalsozialistische Europapropaganda geglaubt. Bei aller Diversität ermöglichen die Briefe Einblicke in eine sich neu formierende Zivilgesellschaft. Die Mehrzahl der Verfasser sind Männer, der Frauenanteil unter den Autor*innen entspricht in etwa einem Viertel bis einem Drittel. Besondere Aufmerksamkeit wird in allen Quellenstudien der Frage gewidmet, wie Europavorstellungen – hier meistens „Vereinigte Staaten von Europa“ – mit Demokratie und Menschenrechten verbunden wurden. Dies führt zu einem differenzierten Befund. Es zeigt sich, dass diese Verbindung erst entwickelt werden musste und ihre Popularisierung ein schwieriges Unterfangen darstellte. Wenn uns diese Verbindung heute selbstverständlich erscheint, dann belegt das Buch, wie

168

Summaries

wenig selbstverständlich der Weg hierhin gewesen war. Das lag nicht zuletzt an den Schwierigkeiten, den Begriff von Zivilisation selber zu entkolonialisieren. ENGLISH European integration was not initially merely the business of a few key persons, as official documents and EU politicians suggest, but was in fact largely prepared by civil society during the interwar period, by the resistance during the Second World War and by the European movements of the postwar period. There are currently more and more studies being published on “Europe from below”, and in this context, the research presented in this book provides the pre-history of today. The institutionalization of European integration since the 1950s has somewhat marginalized civil society actors who developed and decisively advanced the idea of a democratic unification of Europe from the end of the nineteenth century until the 1950s. This study focuses on the initiatives by Freemasons and human rights defenders during the interwar period for the construction of a democratic and united Europe, often under the catchphrase of the “United States of Europe”. Such an approach has hitherto not been explored even though both movements were pillars and networking nodes of civil society during the interwar period. They established links with League of Nations associations, feminist associations, anti-racism leagues and other NGOs. As a result, Masons and human rights defenders are not an arbitrary field of investigation but in fact very representative for an unprecedented comprehensive study of European civil society in the interwar period. The term “civil society” as used in this book is closely related to the societal development of democracy since the late eighteenth century, when the first “NGOs” – such as anti-slavery clubs and peace organizations, with the latter appearing around 1815 – attempted to compensate for the lack of democratic action by countries and their governments. This was also characteristic of the revolutionary states that appeared during the Atlantic Revolutions (United States, First French Republic). The human rights leagues in which defenders of the human rights applied themselves were often founded by Freemasons – or at least, Masons were often involved. Hence the link between these two movements with national and European or international organizational structures mentioned in the title of the book. For both movements, the reference to 1789 and the Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen was extremely important. Archival research has revealed that the pursuit of “European unity” or a “United States of Europe” were fundamental topics for Freemasons and human rights defenders. Depending on the direction of their orientations, establishing the link between Europe, democracy and human rights was essential. The subject also regularly led to debates on colonialism and the nature of European civilization as such.

English

169

The two movements were part of the European and national civil societies of the interwar period, with France serving as the centre for both of them as well as for European civil society as a whole. This was partly due to historical reasons: French civilization was considered to represent the best of Europe and fulfil a civilizing mission. Many contemporaries felt guided by France as a “culture of orientation” – which in turn was partly owed to pragmatic reasons because, starting with Italy as the first fascist country in Europe after the First World War, Masons and human rights defenders, like many others, were persecuted for their liberal, often democratic attitudes, and thus had to seek asylum and a safe location from which to operate. This “safe haven” was very often France. As far as the human rights leagues are concerned, the International Federation of Human Rights (FIDH; also “Ligue internationale des Droits de l’Homme”, LIDH), founded in 1922, was based in Paris on the premises of the French League of Human Rights. From the beginning, the Italian ligueurs, who were persecuted in their homeland, remained in France and carried numerical weight. Of the more than 30 leagues operating during the interwar period, most exile leagues worked in Paris or elsewhere in France. This study focuses on the LIDH/FIDH and, consequently, on the European network that included member associations from Central and Eastern Europe, from the Balkans through Austria and Czechoslovakia to France and Spain. Each league certainly had its own profile, but their activities often cannot be clearly separated from those of the parent league, the French League of Human Rights. The LIDH/FIDH archives are located at the former Bibliothèque de documentation internationale contemporaine (BDIC) in Paris-Nanterre, which is now called La Contemporaine. Bibliothèque, Archives, Musée des Mondes contemporains. The archives had been confiscated by the Gestapo, then fell into the hands of the Red Army at the end of the Second World War and were kept in secret archives in Moscow, from where they were returned to France at the beginning of the 2000s. The nature of the subject of this book and the mentioned specific “European function” of France necessitate a certain focus on France, but it must be emphasized that this, however, results from the nature of the subject. Freemasons become a focal point of interest through their close ties to the human rights leagues. The study begins with European perspectives in the history of the Freemasons before continuing with a French case study, the Grande Loge de France. The archives of this lodge could be consulted, including those parts kept in the secret Soviet archives in Moscow for half a century. The subject of “Europe” was surprisingly important to the Masons, and this fact has not yet been the subject of extensive scientific research. The same applies to the European commitment of the human rights leagues. The case study in this book also proposes a new approach to international Masonic research by identifying Europe – or the “United States of Europe” – as a subject of interest for the lodges. The discussed movements were not marginal phenomena: In the early 1930s, the French League of Human Rights had more than 180,000 members. The other leagues were certainly smaller, but by no means ineffective. At the same time, the Freemasons had around half a million members across Europe. And although not

170

Summaries

all of these persons were interested in the topic of Europe – or even in that of democracy itself – many certainly were. This book addresses the question of how their arguments were generated and how they were disseminated. Did they come from the “bottom”, from the local and regional chapters? The study also includes a gender perspective. The Masonic lodges were essentially men’s societies, but there were mixed lodges as well. The majority of human rights league members were presumably likewise men, but women often played key roles, and women’s rights were a central topic. This book thus develops a fascinating field of investigation and modifies to a degree the traditional research on the history of the idea of the “United States of Europe”. From a prospective point of view, it is important to extend this research even further into the realm of civil society, which held a great appeal during the interwar period. Furthermore, while the study focuses on the interwar period, there are links to the Second World War and the initial period thereafter. As far as the Second World War is concerned, this link is provided by the resistance movements, which are fortunately reasonably well documented. During the early postwar period, the numerous speeches by Winston Churchill (who was a Freemason) on the theme of the “United States of Europe” had a major impact. They were broadcast by various media and touched the hearts and minds of many ordinary citizens. This is evidenced by several hundred letters to Churchill from authors from a large number of countries, which were preserved by the European Movement and are now kept in the archives of the European Union at the European University Institute of Florence. Likewise analysed in this book, these letters embody the grassroots engagement with Europe during the first years after the war. Some of their authors had already participated in initiatives for a united Europe during the interwar period, while others had only discovered the subject through Churchill’s speeches. Still others had believed in the “European” propaganda of the fascists and National Socialists. Despite their diversity – or perhaps because of it – the letters offer insights into the newly formed civil society after 1945. Most authors were men, with the proportion of women around one-third. In all the analyses of primary sources in this book, particular attention has been paid to the question of how European concepts – and here mainly that of the “United States of Europe” – were linked to democracy and human rights. The result is a somewhat surprising one, for it turns out that this link had to be developed first and that its subsequent extension was a difficult undertaking. Although the connection seems self-evident today, this book shows what a laborious process it was to establish it – especially due to the difficulty of “decolonizing” the concept of civilization itself.

Français

171

FRANÇAIS L’intégration européenne, au début, n’était pas l’affaire de quelques-uns, comme le disent des documents officiels et des responsables politiques de l’UE, mais elle a été largement préparée par la société civile durant l’entre-deux-guerres, par la Résistance pendant la Seconde Guerre mondiale et par les Mouvements européens de l’après-guerre. Actuellement, il existe de plus en plus d’études sur « l’Europe d’en bas ». À cet égard, la recherche présentée ici fournit la pré-histoire de l’aujourd’hui. L’institutionnalisation de l’intégration européenne depuis les années 1950 a quelque peu marginalisé les acteurs de la société civile, ayant développé et avancé de manière décisive l’idée d’Etats-Unis démocratiques de l’Europe depuis la fin du XIXe siècle jusqu’aux années 1950. L’étude porte sur les initiatives prises par les francs-maçons et les défenseurs des droits de l’homme durant l’entre-deux-guerres, souvent sous le slogan des Etats-Unis d’Europe, en vue de la construction d’une Europe démocratique et unie. Une telle approche n’a pas été explorée jusqu’à présent, bien que les deux mouvements aient été des piliers et des nœuds de réseautage de la société civile dans l’entre-deux-guerres. Ils ont noué des liens avec des associations de la Société des Nations, des associations féministes, des ligues antiracistes et d’autres ONG. En conséquence, les maçons et les défenseurs des droits de l’homme ne constituent pas un champ d’investigation arbitraire, mais peuvent être considérés comme représentatifs d’une étude approfondie sans précédent de la société civile européenne dans la période de l’entre-deux-guerres. Le terme de société civile dans ce livre est étroitement lié au développement social de la démocratie depuis la fin du XVIIIe siècle, lorsque les premières « ONG » telles que les clubs anti-esclavagistes et les organisations de la paix, apparues vers 1815, essayaient de combler le manque d’action démocratique des Etats. Cela était également caractéristique des Etats révolutionnaires apparus pendant la révolution atlantique (Etats-Unis, Première République française). Les ligues des droits de l’homme dans lesquelles travaillaient les défenseurs des droits de l’homme étaient souvent fondées par des francs-maçons, du moins, ceux-ci étaient souvent partie prenante. D’où le lien entre les deux mouvements mentionnés dans le titre de l’ouvrage, qui possèdent des structures organisationnelles nationales et européennes ou internationales. Pour les deux, la référence à 1789, à savoir la Déclaration des droits de l’homme et du citoyen, était extrêmement importante. Les recherches d’archives ont révélé que « l’unité européenne » ou les « Etats-Unis d’Europe » constituaient un sujet fondamental pour les francsmaçons et les défenseurs des droits de l’homme. Suivant l’orientation de ces associations, établir le lien entre Europe, démocratie et droits de l’homme était essentiel. Le sujet a également régulièrement conduit à des débats sur le colonialisme et la nature de la civilisation européenne. Les deux mouvements font partie des sociétés civiles européenne et nationales de l’entre-deux-guerres. Cependant, la France était le centre des deux mouvements ainsi que de la société civile européenne. C’était en partie pour des raisons

172

Summaries

historiques, car la civilisation française fut considérée comme représentant le meilleur de l’Europe et remplissant une mission civilisatrice. Elle parvenait ainsi à convaincre de nombreux contemporains guidés par la France en tant que « culture d’orientation ». Cela était en partie dû à des raisons pragmatiques car, à commencer par l’Italie en tant que premier pays fasciste en Europe après la Première Guerre mondiale, les maçons et les défenseurs des droits de l’homme, comme beaucoup d’autres, ont été persécutés en raison de leurs attitudes libérales, souvent démocratiques, pourquoi ils devaient chercher asile et un lieu d’action. C’était très souvent la France, avant d’autres pays. En ce qui concerne les ligues des droits de l’homme, la Fédération (ou Ligue) internationale des droits de l’homme (FIDH/LIDH), fondée en 1922, était basée à Paris, dans les locaux de la Ligue française. Dès le début, les Ligueurs italiens poursuivis dans leur patrie restèrent en France et eurent également un poids numérique. Sur un peu plus de 30 ligues dans l’entre-deux-guerres, la plupart des exilés travaillaient à Paris ou ailleurs en France. L’étude porte sur la LIDH/FIDH et, partant, sur le réseau européen, au sein duquel se trouvent des associations membres originaires de l’Europe centrale et orientale, des Balkans jusqu’à la France et à l’Espagne, en passant par l’Autriche et la Tchécoslovaquie. Elles obtiennent leur profil à elles, mais souvent leurs activités ne sont pas clairement à discerner des activités de la ligue-mère, la Ligue française des droits de l’homme. Les archives de la LIDH/FIDH se trouvent à la BDIC, Bibliothèque de documentation internationale contemporaine, Paris-Nanterre, qui s’appelle désormais « La Contemporaine. Bibliothèque, Archives, Musée des Mondes contemporains ». Les dossiers de la LIDH/FIDH avaient été confisqués par la Gestapo, puis ils sont tombés entre les mains de l’Armée rouge à la fin de la guerre, et furent ensuite conservés dans des archives secrètes à Moscou, d’où ils rentrèrent en France au début des années 2000. La fonction spécifiquement européenne de la France exige dans le livre une certaine focalisation sur la France, mais il faut souligner que cela résulte toutefois de la nature des choses. Les francs-maçons entrent dans le centre de l’intérêt par leurs liens étroits avec les ligues des droits de l’homme. L’étude débute par des perspectives européennes dans l’histoire des francs-maçons, puis aboutit à une étude de cas française, la Grande Loge de France, dont les archives pouvaient être consultées, y compris les archives conservées pendant un demi-siècle aux Archives secrètes de Moscou. L’importance du sujet « Europe » était étonnamment grande chez les maçons et n’a pas encore fait l’objet de recherches scientifiques approfondies. Il en va de même pour l’engagement européen des ligues des droits de l’homme. Une telle étude de cas propose également une nouvelle approche dans la recherche maçonnique internationale en adressant l’Europe ou les « Etats-Unis d’Europe » comme domaine d’intérêt des loges. Ce ne sont pas des phénomènes marginaux : au début des années 1930, la Ligue française des droits de l’homme comptait plus de 180 000 membres. Les autres ligues étaient, certes, plus petites, mais n’étaient nullement inefficaces. À l’époque, les francs-maçons en Europe comptaient environ un demi-million de membres. Bien que tout le monde n’ait pas été intéressé par le thème européen,

Français

173

pas même par la démocratie, d’autres l’ont été. Le livre aborde notamment la question de savoir comment les arguments ont été créés et comment ils ont été diffusés. Sont-ils également venus d’en bas dans les organisations membres ? L’étude repose également sur une perspective de genre. Les loges maçonniques étaient essentiellement des corps d’hommes, mais il y avait des loges mixtes. Dans les ligues des droits de l’homme, la majorité des membres étaient probablement des hommes, mais les femmes ont souvent joué un rôle central. Les droits des femmes y étaient un sujet central. L’ouvrage ouvre ainsi un champ de recherche intéressant et modifie quelque peu la recherche traditionnelle sur l’histoire de l’idée des « Etats-Unis d’Europe ». D’un point de vue prospectif, il est important d’étendre encore plus cette recherche à la société civile, qui peut revendiquer un grand intérêt pour l’entredeux-guerres. L’étude se concentre sur l’entre-deux-guerres, mais il existe des liens avec la Seconde Guerre mondiale et la première période d’après-guerre. En ce qui concerne la Seconde Guerre mondiale, il s’agit des mouvements de résistance qui, d’ailleurs, sont raisonnablement bien documentés. Au début de l’après-guerre, les nombreux discours de Winston Churchill (il était franc-maçon) sur le thème des « Etats-Unis d’Europe » eurent un impact majeur. Ils ont été diffusés par de nombreux médias et ont également touché des citoyens ordinaires. En témoignent plusieurs centaines de lettres, adressées à Churchill par des auteur(e)s provenant d’un grand nombre de pays, qui ont été conservées par le « Mouvement européen ». Elles se trouvent maintenant dans les archives de l’Union Européenne à l’Institut universitaire européen de Florence et sont analysées dans ce livre. Les lettres appartiennent à « l’Europe d’en bas » des premières années d’après-guerre. Certains des auteur(e)s avaient déjà partagé des initiatives pour une Europe unie pendant l’entre-deux-guerres, d’autres ont découvert le sujet à propos des discours de Churchill, et encore d’autres avaient cru en la propagande européenne fasciste et nationale-socialiste. Malgré leur diversité, les lettres donnent un aperçu de la société civile nouvellement formée. La majorité des auteur(e)s sont des hommes ; la proportion de femmes est d’environ un quart ou un tiers. Dans toutes les études des sources primaires, une attention particulière est accordée à la question de savoir comment les concepts européens – ici principalement les « Etats-Unis d’Europe » – ont été liés à la démocratie et aux droits de l’homme. Cela conduit à une conclusion différenciée. Il s’est avéré que ce lien devait d’abord être développé et que sa vulgarisation était une entreprise difficile. Si cette connexion semble aller de soi aujourd’hui, le livre montre à quel point il avait été difficile d’en arriver là. Cela était dû en particulier aux difficultés de la décolonisation du concept de civilisation même.

DOCUMENTATION PRIMARY SOURCES: ARCHIVES A La Contemporaine. Bibliothèque, Archives, Musée des mondes contemporains, Paris Nanterre; former name until spring 2018: Bibliothèque de documentation internationale contemporaine (BDIC) Archives des collectivités Ligue des droits de l’homme (France) – Archives rapatriées de Moscou, relations avec les Ligues étrangères Ligue internationale des droits de l’homme (1930–1938): F delta res 0798/54 Ligue allemande: F delta res 0798/55, F delta res 0798/56, F delta res 0798/57 Ligues albanaise, anglaise, argentine, arménienne, autrichienne, belge, bulgare, espagnole, grecque et hongroise: F delta res 0798/58 Ligues italienne et luxembourgeoise: F delta res 0798/59 Ligues norvégienne, polonaise, portugaise, russe, suisse et tchécoslovaque: F delta res 0798/60 Europe orientale: F delta res 0798/64 F delta res 0798/65, portfolio colonies Cahiers des droits de l’homme F delta res 798/45, Liste des ouvrages et brochures offerts en don à la Bibliothèque nationale par la Ligue des Droits de l’Homme (1934) F delta res 798/46, handwritten notice about subscriptions of Les Cahiers des droits de l’homme F delta res 798/47, subscriptions F delta res 798/48, subscriptions, letters Commission d’études coloniales (1927). Commission féministe (1923–1937) F delta res 798/9, meeting of Commission coloniale 12 July 1928

Various fonds Fonds Congrès de l’Europe (1948): F delta res 0114 Fonds Prudhommeaux: F delta res 720, 733, 734, 735, 736 Fonds Célestin Bouglé: F delta res 852 Fonds Société des Nations, Coopération intellectuelle: 4 delta 1056 Fonds Société des Nations, Commission d’Étude pour l’Union Européenne: 4 delta 1098

176

Documentation

Les Cahiers des droits de l’homme (print, copy of BDIC) Années: 1914, 1920, 1921, 1922, 1923, 1924, 1925, 1926, 1927, 1928, 1929, 1930, 1931, 1932

B European University Institute – Historical Archives of the European Union, Florence ME – Mouvement Européen ME-279: 1948–1950, Réactions au discours tenu par Winston Churchill à Zurich (19/09/1946), Correspondance, classée par ordre alphabétique (K–L), adressée à Winston Churchill ME-280: 1948–1950, Réactions au discours tenu par Winston Churchill à Zurich (19/09/1946), Correspondance, classée par ordre alphabétique (A–E), adressée à Winston Churchill ME-281: 1948–1950, Réactions au discours tenu par Winston Churchill à Zurich (19/09/1946), Correspondance, classée par ordre alphabétique (F–K), adressée à Winston Churchill ME-282: 1946–1950, Réactions au discours tenu par Winston Churchill à Zurich (19/09/1946), Correspondance adressée à Winston Churchill ME-283: 1948–1950, Réactions au discours tenu par Winston Churchill à Zurich (19/09/1946), Correspondance adressée à Winston Churchill ME-284: 1946–1948, Réactions au discours tenu par Winston Churchill à Zurich (19/09/1946), Correspondance adressée à Winston Churchill ME-285: 1947–1950, Réactions au discours tenu par Winston Churchill à Zurich (19/09/1946), Correspondance adressée à Winston Churchill ME-286: 1947–1950, Réactions au discours tenu par Winston Churchill à Zurich (19/09/1946), Correspondance adressée à Winston Churchill ME-287: 1947–1950, Réactions au discours tenu par Winston Churchill à Zurich (19/09/1946), Correspondance adressée à Winston Churchill ME-348: 1947–1948, Réactions au discours tenu par Winston Churchill à Zurich (19/09/1946), Correspondance adressée à Winston Churchill ME-637: 1947–1950, Réactions au discours tenu par Winston Churchill à Zurich (19/09/1946), Correspondance adressée à Winston Churchill ME-639: 1947–1948, Réactions au discours tenu par Winston Churchill à Zurich (19/09/1946), Correspondance adressée à Winston Churchill

C Grande Loge de France, Paris (GLDF) GLDF Archives: Archives russes Fonds 93, Opis 1, Boite 45 (convention 1927, “Les colonies dans une démocratie”) Fonds 93, Opis 1, Boite 49A (convention 1933, “Statut de l’Europe de demain”) Fonds 93, Opis 1, Boite 66 (other associations, printed press articles, etc.)

Other Primary Sources

177

Fonds 93, Opis 1, Boite 67 (other associations, Ligue des droits de l’homme etc.)

GLDF Archives Convent 1933 – “Statut de l’Europe de demain” (four boxes, no particular number or signature)

GLDF Bibliothèque GLDF Bulletin Officiel 1920, 1921, 1922, 1923, 1924, 1925, 1926, 1927, 1928, 1929, 1930 L’Acacia. Revue mensuelle d’études maçonniques. 9e année 1911, 10e année 1912, 11e année 1913 L’Acacia. Revue d’études et d’action maçonniques et sociales. Nouvelle série 1923 (No 1–5), 1924 (No 6–14), 1925 (No 15–18), 1927 (No 35, 36, 42, 44), 1928 (No 45), 1929 (No 55)

OTHER PRIMARY SOURCES [Anderson, James]; Langlet, Philippe, ed. (2018): La Constitution des francs-maçons 1723. Paris (Les dix-huitièmes siècles, 202). Anonym (1951): Goebbels-Nachlass. Der Stenograf muss es wissen. In: Der Spiegel, 24 January, p. 8–12, http://www.spiegel.de/spiegel/print/d-29191941.html. Aulard, Alphonse (1926): Le Fascisme et les Droits de l’Homme. In: Les Cahiers des Droits de l’Homme, No 16, 25 August. Auswärtiges Amt, ed. (1930): Schriftstücke zum Europa-Memorandum der Französischen Regierung. Berlin. Basch, Victor (1920): La paix en péril. In: Les Cahiers des Droits de l’Homme, No 1, 5 January, p. 5. Basch, Victor (1928): Le Malaise Européen. In: Les Cahiers des Droits de l’Homme, No 32, 20 December, p. 762. Basch, Victor (1935): La Paix perpétuelle, règne de la raison et de la justice. In: Messages aux éducateurs, p. 245–246. Bayet, Albert (1924): Pour une élite intellectuelle. In: Les Cahiers des Droits de l’Homme, No 16, 25 August, p. 382–385. Bouglé, Célestin; Gastinel, Pierre (1920): Qu’est-ce que l’esprit français? Vingt définitions choisies et annotées. Paris: Garnier, http://classiques.uqac.ca/classiques/bougle_celestin/esprit_ francais/esprit_francais.html. Boyd, Andres; Boyd, Frances (1949): Western Union. A Study of the Trend toward European Unity. Washington. British Cab-Drivers Anti-Fascist Committee (1938): Whither Civilization? (Gale Primary Sources: Archives Unbound Collection, 7 pages, Microfilm Reel No 37, Source Library: McMaster University Library, Gale Document Number: GALE|SC5110126543, http://tinyurl.galegroup. com/tinyurl/3wXWZ0, accessed 7 November 2016). Bulletin. Organe officiel de l’Association maçonnique internationale, N o 1, 1922 (= Bulletin No 56, XXe année, Bureau international de relations maçonniques) – No 70, 1939 (copy Archiv der Großloge von Österreich). Camus, Albert (1994): Le premier homme [ca. 1959]. Paris (unfinished manuscript). Churchill, Winston S. (1948): The Sinews of Peace. Post-War Speeches, ed. by Randolph S. Churchill, London.

178

Documentation

Churchill, Winston S. (1950): Europe Unite. Speeches 1947 and 1948, ed. by Randolph S. Churchill. London. The Covenant of the League of Nations, http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/leagcov.asp. Declaration of the Leaders of 27 Member States and of the European Council, the European Parliament and the European Commission, Rome, 25 March 2017, https://www.consilium. europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2017/03/25/rome-declaration/. Delaisi, Francis (1931): Industries de guerre et industries de paix. Paris: Ligue des droits de l’homme. Dupuy, Paul; Gallois, Lucien (1938): Fernand Maurette (1878–1937). In: Annales de Géographie, vol. 47, p. 199–202, http://www.persee.fr/doc/geo_0003-4010_1938_num_47_266_11843. Dumont-Wilden, Louis (1914): L’Esprit européen. Paris. Extract in: Stelandre, Yves, ed. (1992): L’idée européenne dans l’entre-deux-guerres. Recueil de textes réunis à l’initiative de Michel Dumoulin par Yves Stelandre. Louvain-la-Neuve, p. 9–15. Filene, Edward A. (1925): Le problème européen et sa solution. Paris (original in English, French translation by Francis Delaisi, foreword by Paul Painlevé). Forschungsinstitut der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Auswärtige Politik e.V., ed. (1962): Europa. Dokumente zur Frage der europäischen Einigung. Munich (Dokumente und Berichte, 17.1). Goldscheid, Rudolf (1926): Der Ausbau des Paktes von Locarno und der Zusammenschluss Europas. In: Die Friedens-Warte, vol. 9, p. 270–273. Gollwitzer, Heinz (1951): Europabild und Europagedanke. Munich. Guizot, François Pierre Guillaume (1828): Cours d’histoire moderne. Histoire générale de la civilisation en Europe. Paris. Guizot, François; Hazlitt, William, transl.; Siedentop, Larry, ed. (1997): The History of Civilization in Europe. London – New York. Heerfordt, C. F. (1924, 1926): Et nyt Europa, 2 vols. in one book, Copenhagen. Institut für Zeitgeschichte, ed. (2007): Die Tagebücher von Joseph Goebbels, Teil III, Register 1923–1945, vol. 1: Geographisches Register. Personenregister. Berlin – Boston: de Gruyter, Saur (eBook 2012). Lehmann-Russbüldt, Otto (1925): Republik Europa. Berlin-Hessenwinkel: Verlag der Neuen Gesellschaft. Lemonnier, Charles (1872): Les États-Unis d’Europe. Paris: Librairie de la Bibliothèque Démocratique. Lepeytre, Henry (1947): Le Retour à la Paix. Paris: Fayard. Febvre, Lucien (1999): L’Europe. Genèse d’une civilisation. Cours professé au Collège de France en 1944/45, établi, présenté et annoté par Thérèse Charmasson et Brigitte Mazon, avec la collaboration de Sarah Lüdemann. Préface de Marc Ferro. Paris. League of Nations search engine, http://www.lonsea.de/. Lipgens, Walter, ed. (1968): Europa-Föderationspläne der Widerstandsbewegungen 1940–1945. Dokumentation. Munich (Schriften des Forschungsinstituts der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Auswärtige Politik, 26). Lipgens, Walter; Loth, Wilfried, eds. (1985–1991): Documents on the History of European Integration, 4 vols. Berlin. Malinowski, Bronisław (1947): Freedom and Civilization [1942; with a preface by Valetta Malinowska, dated New York, March, 1944]. London. Masaryk, Tomáš Garrigue (1918): The New Europe. The Slav Standpoint. London: Eyre and Spottiswoode. Mersch, Jules, ed. (1963): Biographie nationale du pays de Luxembourg, vol. 12. Luxembourg, p. 471–476. Bibliothèque nationale de Luxembourg: Luxemburgensia online, http://www. luxemburgensia.bnl.lu/cgi/luxonline1_2.pl?action=fv&sid=luxbio&vol=12&page=471 (biographical note on Aline Mayrisch de Saint-Hubert). Reynold, Gonzague de (1941–1957): La Formation de l’Europe, 7 vols. Paris.

Secondary Literature

179

Ruyssen, Théodore (1925): La colonisation et le droit. In: Les Cahiers des Droits de l’Homme, No 21, 15 October, p. 489–491. Saint-Simon, Claude-Henri de (1814): Réorganisation de la société européenne. Paris. Stelandre, Yves, ed. (1992): L’idée européenne dans l’entre-deux-guerres. Recueil de textes réunis à l’initiative de Michel Dumoulin par Yves Stelandre. Louvain-la-Neuve. Wiener Freimaurer-Zeitung, ed. by Großloge von Wien, 1919–1937 (copy Archiv der Großloge von Österreich).

SECONDARY LITERATURE Adloff, Frank (2005): Zivilgesellschaft. Theorie und politische Praxis. Frankfurt am Main – New York. Agrikoliansky, Éric (2002): La Ligue française des Droits de l’homme et du citoyen depuis 1945. Sociologie d’un engagement civique. Paris (Logiques politiques). Agrikoliansky, Éric (2004): La guerre d’Algérie: Une “nouvelle affaire Dreyfus”? In: Manceron, Gilles; Rebérioux, Madeleine, eds.: Droits de l’homme – Combats du siècle, Nanterre – Paris, p. 218–231. Alba, Yolanda (2014): Masonas. Historia de la masonería femenina. Córdoba. Aubert, Paul (2017): The Spanish League of Human Rights. In: Schmale, Wolfgang; Treiblmayr, Christopher, eds.: Human Rights Leagues in Europe (1898–2016). Stuttgart, p. 123–137. Bacot, Jean-Pierre (2009): Les femmes et la Franc-Maçonnerie en Europe. Histoire et géographie d’une inégalité. Paris. Bader-Zaar, Birgitta; Diendorfer, Gertraud; Reitmair-Juárez, Susanne, eds. (2017): Friedenskonzepte im Wandel. Analyse der Vergabe des Friedensnobelpreises von 1901 bis 2016. Innsbruck. Badila, Joseph; Béresniak, Daniel (2008): Les francs-maçons et l’Afrique. Une rencontre fraternelle. Avec la collaboration de Jean Moreau. Paris. Baechler, Christian; Müller, Klaus-Jürgen, eds. (1996): Les tiers dans les relations francoallemandes / Dritte in den deutsch-französischen Beziehungen. Munich. Bariéty, Jacques, ed. (1987): Mouvements et initiatives de paix dans la politique internationale / Peace Movements and Initiatives in International Policy / Friedens-Bewegungen und -Anregungen in der internationalen Politik. 1867–1928. Actes du colloque tenu à Stuttgart 29–30 août 1985. Bern. Bariéty, Jacques, ed. (2007): Aristide Briand, la Société des Nations et l’Europe 1919–1932. Strasbourg. Barth, Boris; Osterhammel, Jürgen, eds. (2005): Zivilisierungsmissionen. Imperiale Weltverbesserung seit dem 18. Jahrhundert. Konstanz. Bauerkämper, Arnd, ed. (2003): Die Praxis der Zivilgesellschaft. Akteure, Handeln und Strukturen im internationalen Vergleich. Frankfurt am Main – New York. Beaurepaire, Pierre-Yves (2002): L’Europe des francs-maçons, XVIIIe–XXIe siècles. Paris. Becker, Marvin B. (1994): The Emergence of Civil Society in the Eighteenth Century. A Privileged Moment in the History of England, Scotland, and France. Bloomington. Berger, Joachim (2010): European Freemasonries, 1850–1935: Networks and Transnational Movements. In: Europäische Geschichte Online (EGO), ed. by Institut für Europäische Geschichte (IEG), Mainz, http://www.ieg-ego.eu/bergerj-2010-en, URN: urn:nbn:de:015920100921522. Berger, Joachim; Grün, Klaus-Jürgen, eds. (2002): Geheime Gesellschaft. Weimar und die deutsche Freimaurerei. Katalog zur Ausstellung der Stiftung Weimarer Klassik im SchillerMuseum Weimar 21. Juni bis 31. Dezember 2002. Munich.

180

Documentation

Bermeo, Nancy; Nord, Philip, eds. (2000): Civil Society before Democracy. Lessons from Nineteenth-Century Europe. Boston. Birn, Donald S. (1981): The League of Nations Union. 1918–1945. Oxford. Bluche, Lorraine; Lipphardt, Veronika; Patel, Kiran Klaus, eds. (2009): Der Europäer – Ein Konstrukt. Wissensbestände, Diskurse, Praktiken. Göttingen. Bock, Hans Manfred (1994): Kulturelle Eliten in den deutsch-französischen Gesellschaftsbeziehungen der Zwischenkriegszeit. In: Hudemann, Rainer; Soutou, Georges-Henri, eds.: Eliten in Deutschland und Frankreich im 19. und 20. Jahrhundert. Strukturen und Beziehungen, vol. 1. Munich, p. 73–91. Bogdan, Henrik; Snoek, J. A. M., eds. (2014): Handbook of Freemasonry. Leiden (Brill Handbooks on Contemporary Religion). Bonfreschi, Lucia; Orsina, Giovanni; Varsori, Antonio, eds. (2015): European Parties and the European Integration Process, 1945–1992. Brussels. Bossuat, Gérard, ed. (2003): Inventer l’Europe. Histoire nouvelle des groupes d’influence et des acteurs de l’unité européenne. Avec la collaboration de Georges Saunier. Brussels. Böttcher, Winfried, ed. (2014): Klassiker des europäischen Denkens. Friedens- und Europavorstellungen aus 700 Jahren europäischer Kulturgeschichte. Baden-Baden. Brendel, Thomas (2005): Zukunft Europa? Das Europabild und die Idee der internationalen Solidarität bei den deutschen Liberalen im Vormärz (1815–1848). Bochum. Browning, Christopher R. (1992): Ordinary Men. Reserve Police Battalion 101 and the Final Solution in Poland. New York. Bruneteau, Bernard (2016): Les “collabos” de l’Europe nouvelle. Paris. Burgard, Oliver (2000): Das gemeinsame Europa – von der politischen Utopie zum außenpolitischen Programm. Meinungsaustausch und Zusammenarbeit pro-europäischer Verbände in Deutschland und Frankreich, 1924–1933. Frankfurt am Main. Buschak, Willy (2014): Die Vereinigten Staaten von Europa sind unser Ziel. Arbeiterbewegung und Europa im frühen 20. Jahrhundert. Essen. Bussière, Éric; Dard, Olivier; Duchenne, Geneviève, eds. (2015): Francis Delaisi, du dreyfusisme à “l’Europe nouvelle”. Brussels. Calderwood, Paul (2013): Freemasonry and the Press in the Twentieth Century. A National Newspaper Study of England and Wales. Farnham. Canales, Jimena (2005): Einstein, Bergson, and the Experiment that Failed. Intellectual Cooperation at the League of Nations. In: Modern Language Notes, vol. 120, p. 1168–1191, DOI: 10.1353/mln.2006.0005. Caraffini, Paolo (2008): Costruire l’Europa dal basso. Il ruolo del Consiglio italiano del movimento europeo (1948–1985). Bologna. Castells, Manuel (1996): The Information Age: Economy, Society and Culture, 2nd ed. Oxford. Cazzaniga, Gian Mario, ed. (2012): La Massoneria. Torino (Storia d’Italia. Annali, 21). Charle, Christophe (2001): La crise des sociétés impériales. Allemagne, France, Grande-Bretagne (1900–1940). Essai d’histoire sociale comparé. Paris. Chato Gonzalo, Ignazio, ed. (1997): Las relaciones masónicas entre España y Portugal 1866–1932. Un estudio de la formación de los nacionalismos español y portugués a través de la masonería. Mérida. Claussen, Detlev (1988): Nach Auschwitz. Ein Essay über die Aktualität Adornos. In: Diner, Dan, ed.: Zivilisationsbruch. Denken nach Auschwitz. Frankfurt am Main, p. 54–68. Claveau, Cylvie (2000): L’Autre dans les Cahiers des Droits de l’Homme, 1920–1940. Une sélection universaliste de l’altérité à la Ligue des Droits de l’Homme et du Citoyen en France, Montréal (Ph.D. thesis, McGill University, http://digitool.library.mcgill.ca/R/?func=dbinjump-full&object_id=37604). Clemens, Gabriele, ed. (2016): Werben für Europa. Die mediale Konstruktion europäischer Identität durch Europafilme. Paderborn.

Secondary Literature

181

Colás, Alejandro (2013): International Civil Society. Social Movements in World Politics. Hoboken. Combe, Sonia; Cingal, Grégory, eds. (2004): Retour de Moscou. Paris: La Découverte (Recherches). Combe, Sonia (2004): Paris-Moscou, aller-retour: historique d’une spoliation et d’une restitution. In: Combe, Sonia; Cingal, Grégory, eds.: Retour de Moscou. Paris: La Découverte (Recherches), p. 17–26. Combes, André (2001): La franc-maçonnerie sous l’Occupation. Persécution et résistance (1939– 1945). Monaco. Combes, André (2018): 1914–1968. La Franc-Maçonnerie, cœur battant de la République. Éclatée, féminisée, persécutée, renforcée. Préface d’Andreas Önnerfors. Paris (Collection L’univers maçonnique). Conti, Fulvio (2015): La Franc-maçonnerie et le mouvement pour la paix en Europe (1889–1914). In: Cahiers de la Méditerranée, No 91, p. 87–99, http://cdlm.revues.org/8101. Conze, Vanessa (2004): Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi. Umstrittener Visionär Europas. Gleichen. Conze, Vanessa (2005): Das Europa der Deutschen. Ideen von Europa in Deutschland zwischen Reichstradition und Westorientierung (1920–1970). Munich. Cottrell, Robert (2016): Roger Nash Baldwin and the American Civil Liberties Union. New York, NY: Columbia University Press. Cruz, José Ignacio (1993): Masonería y educación en la II República Española. Alicante. Dalloz, Jacques (2004): Francs-maçons d’Indochine à l’épreuve du régime Decoux. In: Outremers, vol. 91, No 342–343: Vichy et les colonies, p. 25–39, DOI: 10.3406/outre.2004.4080. Dard, Olivier; Deschamps, Étienne, eds. (2008): Les relèves en Europe d’un après-guerre à l’autre. Racines, réseaux, projets et postérités, 2nd ed. Brussels (1st ed. 2005). Davies, Thomas (2013): NGOs. A New History of Transnational Civil Society. London. Dées de Sterio, Alexandre Marius (1998): La Franc-Maçonnerie au Luxembourg. Paris (Encyclopédie maçonnique, 5). Demandt, Alexander (2017): Untergänge des Abendlandes. Studien zu Oswald Spengler. Cologne. Deyanov, Stilyan (2017): The Romanian League for Human Rights – a “Child of the Comintern”? (and possible comparison with the Bulgarian League). In: Schmale, Wolfgang; Treiblmayr, Christopher, eds.: Human Rights Leagues in Europe (1898–2016). Stuttgart, p. 195–221. Diner, Dan, ed. (1988): Zivilisationsbruch. Denken nach Auschwitz. Frankfurt am Main. Dingel, Irene; Paulmann, Johannes; Schnettger, Matthias; Wrede, Martin, eds. (2018): Theatrum Belli – Theatrum Pacis. Konflikte und Konfliktregelungen im frühneuzeitlichen Europa. Göttingen. Domínguez Arribas, Javier (2016): L’ennemi judéo-maçonnique dans la propagande franquiste (1936–1945). Paris. Dorowin, Hermann (1991): Retter des Abendlands: Kulturkritik im Vorfeld des europäischen Faschismus. Stuttgart. Dreyfus-Armand, Geneviève (2004): Les archives de la Ligue des droits de l’homme à la BDIC. In: Combe, Sonia; Cingal, Grégory, eds.: Retour de Moscou. Paris: La Découverte (Recherches), p. 9–16. Droux, Joëlle (2012): La tectonique des causes humanitaires: concurrences et collaborations autour du Comité de protection de l’enfance de la Société des Nations (1880–1940). In: Relations internationales, No 151, p. 77–90, DOI: 10.3917/ri.151.0077. Dubiel, Helmut (1988): Kommentar zu Leo Löwenthals “Individuum und Terror”. In: Diner, Dan, ed.: Zivilisationsbruch. Denken nach Auschwitz. Frankfurt am Main, p. 26–29. Ducci, Annamaria (2012): Europe and the Artistic Patrimony of the Interwar Period. The International Institute of Intellectual Cooperation at the League of Nations. In: Hewitson, Mark; D’Auria, Matthew, eds.: Europe in Crisis. Intellectuals and the European Idea, 1917–1957. New York, NY, p. 227–242.

182

Documentation

Duchenne, Geneviève (2008): Esquisses d’une Europe nouvelle. L’européisme dans la Belgique de l’entre-deux-guerres (1919–1939). Brussels. Duchhardt, Heinz; Morawiec, Małgorzata, eds. (2003): Vision Europa. Deutsche und polnische Föderationspläne des 19. und frühen 20. Jahrhunderts. Mainz. Dülffer, Jost; Niedhart, Gottfried, eds. (2011): Frieden durch Demokratie? Genese, Wirkung und Kritik eines Deutungsmusters. Essen. Dumoulin, Michel, ed. (1995): Plans des temps de guerre pour l’Europe d’après-guerre, 1940– 1947 / Wartime Plans for Postwar Europe, 1940–1947. Actes du colloque de Bruxelles 12–14 mai 1993. Baden-Baden – Brussels. Durand, Jean-Dominique, ed. (2013): Christian Democrat Internationalism. Its Action in Europe and Worldwide from post World War II until the 1990s, 2 vols. Brussels. Durosay, Daniel (1986): Paris-Berlin, via Luxembourg. Un relais dans les relations francoallemandes de la NRF: la maison des Mayrisch. In: Bulletin des Amis d’André Gide, No 69, p. 33–56. Edwards, Michael, ed. (2011): The Oxford Handbook of Civil Society. Oxford. Elisha, Achille (2000): Aristide Briand. La paix mondiale et l’union européenne, 2nd ed. Louvainla-Neuve. Engels, David (2013): “Das Gescheiteste, was überhaupt über mich geschrieben ist”. André Fauconnet und Oswald Spengler. In: Gasimov, Zaur; Lemke Duque, Carl Antonius, eds.: Oswald Spengler als europäisches Phänomen. Der Transfer der Kultur- und Geschichtsmorphologie im Europa der Zwischenkriegszeit 1919–1939. Göttingen, p. 105–155. Eyffinger, Arthur (1999): The 1899 Hague Peace Conference. ‘The Parliament of Man, the Federation of the World’. The Hague – London – Boston. Faber, Richard (1979): Abendland. Ein “politischer Kampfbegriff”. Hildesheim. Fedele, Santi (2005): La massoneria italiana nell’esilio e nella clandestinità: 1927–1939. Milan. Ferrer Benimeli, José Antonio (1996): La masonería española. Madrid. Gasimov, Zaur; Lemke Duque, Carl Antonius, eds. (2013): Oswald Spengler als europäisches Phänomen. Der Transfer der Kultur- und Geschichtsmorphologie im Europa der Zwischenkriegszeit 1919–1939. Göttingen. Geremek, Bronisław; National Humanities Center, eds. (1992): The Idea of a Civil Society. National Humanities Center Conference. Research Triangle Park, NC. Gillard, Bernard (2005): Elle enseignait la République. La franc-maçonnerie, laboratoire pédagogique des valeurs républicaines de 1871 à 1906. Paris. Greiner, Florian (2014): Wege nach Europa. Deutungen eines imaginierten Kontinents in deutschen, britischen und amerikanischen Printmedien, 1914–1945. Göttingen. Große Kracht, Klaus (2002): “Ein Europa im Kleinen”. Die Sommergespräche von Pontigny und die deutsch-französische Intellektuellenverständigung in der Zwischenkriegszeit. In: Internationales Archiv für Sozialgeschichte der deutschen Literatur, vol. 27, No 1, p. 144–169. Großmann, Johannes (2014): Die Internationale der Konservativen. Transnationale Elitenzirkel und private Außenpolitik in Westeuropa seit 1945. Munich. Grunert, Robert (2012): Der Europagedanke westeuropäischer faschistischer Bewegungen 1940– 1945. Paderborn. Guieu, Jean-Michel (2003): Le Comité fédéral de Coopération européenne: l’action méconnue d’une organisation internationale privée en faveur de l’union de l’Europe dans les années trente (1928–1940). In: Schirmann, Sylvain, ed.: Organisations internationales et architectures européennes (1929–1939). Metz, p. 73–91. Guieu, Jean-Michel (2008): Le rameau et le glaive. Les militants français pour la Société des nations. Paris.

Secondary Literature

183

Guieu, Jean-Michel; Le Dréau, Christophe, eds. (2009): Le “Congrès de l’Europe” à la Haye (1948–2008). Brussels. Guieu, Jean-Michel (2012): La SDN et ses organisations de soutien dans les années 1920. Entre promotion de l’esprit de Genève et volonté d’influence. In: Relations internationales, No 151, p. 11–23, DOI: 10.3917/ri.151.0011. Gusejnova, Dina (2016): European Elites and Ideas of Empire, 1917–1957. Cambridge. Hall, John A., ed. (1995): Civil Society. Theory, History, Comparison. Cambridge. Hardtwig, Wolfgang, ed. (2005): Politische Kulturgeschichte der Zwischenkriegszeit 1918–1939. Göttingen. Harland-Jacobs, Jessica L. (2007): Builders of Empire. Freemasons and British Imperialism, 1717–1927. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press. Harland-Jacobs, Jessica (2014): Freemasonry and Colonialism. In: Bogdan, Henrik; Snoek, J. A. M., eds.: Handbook of Freemasonry. Leiden, p. 439–460. Heater, Derek (1992): The Idea of European Unity. London. Hecker-Stampehl, Jan (2011): Vereinigte Staaten des Nordens. Integrationsideen in Nordeuropa im Zweiten Weltkrieg. Munich – Berlin. Hémery, Daniel (2001): L’Indochine, les droits humains entre colonisateurs et colonisés, la ligue des Droits de l’Homme (1898–1954). In: Outre-mers, vol. 88, No 330–331: Outre-mers économiques: de l’Histoire à l’actualité du XXIe siècle, p. 223–239, DOI: 10.3406/outre.2001. 3850. Henrich-Franke, Christian, ed. (2014): Die “Schaffung” Europas in der Zwischenkriegszeit. Politische, wirtschaftliche und gesellschaftliche Konstruktionen eines vereinten Europas. Berlin. Hewitson, Mark; D’Auria, Matthew, eds. (2012): Europe in Crisis. Intellectuals and the European Idea, 1917–1957. New York. Hewitson, Mark (2012): The United States of Europe. The European Question in the 1920s. In: Hewitson, Mark; D’Auria, Matthew, eds.: Europe in Crisis. Intellectuals and the European Idea, 1917–1957. New York, p. 15–34. Heyde, Veronika (2010): De l’esprit de la Résistance jusqu’à l’idée de l’Europe. Projets européens et américains pour l’Europe de l’après-guerre (1940–1950). Brussels. Hildermeier, Manfred; Kocka, Jürgen; Conrad, Christoph, eds. (2000): Europäische Zivilgesellschaft in Ost und West. Begriff, Geschichte, Chancen. Frankfurt am Main – New York. Hivert-Messeca, Gisèle; Hivert-Messeca, Yves (1997): Comment la Franc-Maçonnerie vint aux femmes. Deux siècles de Franc-Maçonnerie d’adoption, féminine et mixte en France, 1740– 1940. Paris (2nd ed. 2015 under the title of: Femmes et franc-maçonnerie. Trois siècles de franc-maçonnerie féminine et mixte en France de 1740 à nos jours). Hivert-Messeca, Yves (2012–2018): L’Europe sous l’acacia. Histoire des franc-maçonneries européennes du XVIIIe siècle à nos jours, 4 vols. Paris. Hoffmann, Stefan-Ludwig (2006): Civil society, 1750–1914. Basingstoke, Hampshire. Hoffmann, Stefan-Ludwig (2007): The Politics of Sociability. Freemasonry and German civil society, 1840–1918. Ann Arbor, Mich.: University of Michigan Press. Hoffmann, Stefan-Ludwig, ed. (2010): Moralpolitik. Geschichte der Menschenrechte im 20. Jahrhundert. Internationale Konferenz. Göttingen. Hoffmann, Stefan Ludwig, ed. (2011): Human Rights in the Twentieth Century. Cambridge. Hoffmann, Stefan Ludwig (2011): Introduction. Genealogies of Human Rights. In: Hoffmann, Stefan-Ludwig, ed.: Human Rights in the Twentieth Century. Cambridge, p. 1–26. Horel, Catherine; Sandu, Traian; Taubert, Fritz, eds. (2006): La périphérie du fascisme. Spécification d’un modèle fasciste au sein des sociétés agraires, le cas de l’Europe centrale entre les deux guerres. Paris. Horel, Catherine (2014): L’amiral Horthy. Régent de Hongrie. Paris.

184

Documentation

Horne, John (2005): Kulturelle Demobilmachung 1919–1939. Ein sinnvoller historischer Begriff? In: Hardtwig, Wolfgang, ed.: Politische Kulturgeschichte der Zwischenkriegszeit 1918–1939. Göttingen, p. 129–150. Innerhofer, Roland (1996): Deutsche Science Fiction 1870–1914. Rekonstruktion und Analyse der Anfänge einer Gattung. Vienna. Irvine, William D. (2007): Between Justice and Politics. The Ligue des droits de l’homme, 1898– 1945. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press. Jacob, Margaret C. (1991): Living the Enlightenment. Freemasonry and Politics in EighteenthCentury Europe. New York. Jacob, Margaret C. (2006): The Origins of Freemasonry. Facts & Fictions. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Jessen, Ralph; Reichardt, Sven; Klein, Ansgar, eds. (2004): Zivilgesellschaft als Geschichte. Studien zum 19. und 20. Jahrhundert. Wiesbaden. Karady, Victor, ed. (2008): Elite Formation in the Other Europe (19 th–20th Century) = Historical Social Research (HSR), vol. 33, No 2. Keane, John, ed. (1988): Civil Society and the State. New European Perspectives. London. Klos, Felix (2016): Churchill on Europe. The Untold Story of Churchill’s European Project. London – New York. Knipping, Franz; Dupeux, Louis; Hudemann, Rainer, eds. (1994–1996): Eliten in Deutschland und Frankreich im 19. und 20. Jahrhundert. Strukturen und Beziehungen / Elites en France et en Allemagne aux XIXème et XXème siècles. Structures et relations, 2 vols. Munich. Kuby, Emma (2019): Political Survivors. The Resistance, the Cold War, and the Fight Against Concentration Camps after 1945. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. La Contemporaine, ed. (2017): Cent ans. De la BDIC à la contemporaine = Matériaux pour l’histoire de notre temps, No 125–126. Lefebvre, Denis (2003): La Franc-maçonnerie et la construction européenne. In: Bossuat, Gérard, ed.: Inventer l’Europe. Histoire nouvelle des groupes d’influence et des acteurs de l’unité européenne. Brussels, p. 403–408. Leggewie, Claus (2017): Europa zuerst! Eine Unabhängigkeitserklärung. Berlin. Leloup, Fabienne (2015): Maria Deraismes. Riche, féministe et franc-maçonne. Paris. Le Mercier, Jean-Luc; Lemaire, Jacques Ch., eds. (2006): Europe, Citoyenneté et FrancMaçonnerie. Brussels. Lemke Duque, Carl Antonius (2013): “Permanente Pseudo-Morphose” und “transitive Dekadenz”. Kulturkritische Resemantisierungen der Kultur- und Geschichtsmorphologie Oswald Spenglers im Echo der Madrider Presse (1920–1936). In: Gasimov, Zaur; Lemke Duque, Carl Antonius, eds.: Oswald Spengler als europäisches Phänomen. Der Transfer der Kultur- und Geschichtsmorphologie im Europa der Zwischenkriegszeit 1919–1939. Göttingen, p. 185–237. Leucht, Brigitte; Gehler, Michael; Kaiser, Wolfram, eds. (2010): Transnational Networks in Regional Integration. Governing Europe 1945–83. New York. Leucht, Brigitte; Rasmussen, Morten; Kaiser, Wolfram, eds. (2009): The History of the European Union. Origins of a Trans- and Supranational Polity 1950–72. New York – London. Liauzu, Claude (2004): La Ligue des droits de l’homme et la colonisation. In: Manceron, Gilles; Rebérioux, Madeleine, eds.: Droits de l’homme – Combats du siècle, Nanterre – Paris, p. 142–159. Linklater, Andrew (1982): Men and Citizens in the Theory of International Relations. London. Logt, A. P. A. M. van der (2008): Het theater van de nieuwe orde. Een onderzoek naar het drama van Nederlandse nationaalsocialisten. Amsterdam (Ph.D. thesis, University of Amsterdam, http://hdl.handle.net/11245/1.299814).

Secondary Literature

185

Löwenthal, Leo (1988): Individuum und Terror [1945]. In: Diner, Dan, ed.: Zivilisationsbruch. Denken nach Auschwitz. Frankfurt am Main, p. 15–25. Madsen, Mikael Rask (2011): ‘Legal Diplomacy’. Law, Politics, and the Genesis of Postwar European Human Rights. In: Hoffmann, Stefan-Ludwig, ed.: Human Rights in the Twentieth Century. Cambridge, p. 62–81. Manceron, Gilles; Rebérioux, Madeleine, eds. (2004): Droits de l’homme – Combats du siècle, Nanterre – Paris. Manceron, Gilles (2017): The French Ligue des droits de l’homme’s Interest in International Issues from 1898 to the 1980s. Founding and Supporting the Fédération internationale des droits de l’homme. In: Schmale, Wolfgang; Treiblmayr, Christopher, eds.: Human Rights Leagues in Europe (1898–2016). Stuttgart, p. 45–77. Marcowitz, Reiner; Wilkens, Andreas, eds. (2014): Une “Europe des citoyens”. Société civile et identité européenne de 1945 à nos jours. Bern. Martín, Luis P., ed. (2000): Les francs-maçons dans la cité. Les cultures politiques de la FrancMaçonnerie en Europe (XIXe–XXe siècle). Rennes: Presses universitaires de Rennes. Martín, Luis P. (2000): Le pacifisme et la franc-maçonnerie dans l’Europe de l’entre-deux-guerres. In: Martín, Luis P., ed.: Les francs-maçons dans la cité. Les cultures politiques de la FrancMaçonnerie en Europe (XIXe–XXe siècle). Rennes: Presses universitaires de Rennes, p. 165– 178. Mattioli, Aram (1994): Zwischen Demokratie und totalitärer Diktatur. Gonzague de Reynold und die Tradition der autoritären Rechten in der Schweiz. Zurich. Melfa, Valentina Marica (2010): Massoneria e fascismo. Dall’interventismo alla lotta partigiana. Catania. Merlio, Gilbert; Meyer, Daniel, eds. (2014): Spengler ohne Ende. Ein Rezeptionsphänomen im internationalen Kontext. Frankfurt am Main. Mertens, Lothar (1997): Unermüdlicher Kämpfer für Frieden und Menschenrechte. Leben und Wirken von Kurt R. Grossmann. Berlin (Beiträge zur Politischen Wissenschaft, 97). Minder, Robert A. (2004): Freimaurer Politiker Lexikon. Von Salvador Allende bis Saad Zaghlul Pascha. Innsbruck. Monger, David (2015): Union of Democratic Control. In: 1914–1918-online. International Encyclopedia of the First World War, ed. by Ute Daniel, Peter Gatrell, Oliver Janz, Heather Jones, Jennifer Keene, Alan Kramer, and Bill Nasson, issued by Freie Universität Berlin, DOI: 10.15463/ie1418.10598. Moraitidis, Michalis (2017): The History and the Interventions of the Hellenic League for Human Rights (1918–2016). In: Schmale, Wolfgang; Treiblmayr, Christopher, eds.: Human Rights Leagues in Europe (1898–2016). Stuttgart, p. 139–156. Morin, Gilles (2015): Du CVIA au RPN. “Les tribulations d’un collaborationniste sincère”. In: Bussière, Éric; Dard, Olivier; Duchenne, Geneviève, eds.: Francis Delaisi, du dreyfusisme à “l’Europe nouvelle”. Brussels, p. 181–197. Mrzygłod, Izabella (2017): The League for the Defence of Human and Civil Rights in Interwar Poland (1921–1937). In: Schmale, Wolfgang; Treiblmayr, Christopher, eds.: Human Rights Leagues in Europe (1898–2016). Stuttgart, p. 157–172. Naquet, Emmanuel (2014): Pour l’humanité. La Ligue des droits de l’homme, de l’affaire Dreyfus à la défaite de 1940. Rennes. Niemeyer, Dirk (2012): The Grand Lodge of Prussia (GLPr) and the “no-politics clause” in the Weimar Republic and the Early Third Reich. In: Papenheim, Martin, ed.: Italian and German Freemasonry in the Time of Fascism and National Socialism. Four Essays and a Comparative Introduction. Bayreuth (European Masonic Papers, 1), p. 83–115. Norwig, Christina (2016): Die erste europäische Generation. Europakonstruktionen in der Europäischen Jugendkampagne, 1951–1958. Göttingen.

186

Documentation

Odo, Georges (2001): La Franc-Maçonnerie dans les colonies 1738–1960. Paris (Encyclopédie maçonnique, 30). Olden-Jørgensen, Sebastian (2004): Dänemark und Europa. Streiflichter zu diskursiven Kontinuitäten und Diskontinuitäten von 1600 bis 2000. In: Jahrbuch für Europäische Geschichte, vol. 5, p. 57–81. Ortiz Albear, Natividad (2005): Las mujeres en la masonería. Málaga: Universidad de Málaga. Oudin, Bernard (1987): Aristide Briand: la paix, une idée neuve en Europe. Paris. Papenheim, Martin, ed. (2012): Italian and German Freemasonry in the Time of Fascism and National Socialism. Four Essays and a Comparative Introduction. Bayreuth (European Masonic Papers, 1). Pasture, Patrick (2018): The Invention of European Human Rights. In: History. The Journal of the Historical Association, vol. 103, No 356, p. 485–504. Patel, Kiran Klaus (2018): Projekt Europa. Eine kritische Geschichte. Munich. Patka, Marcus G. (2009): Freimaurerei und “Austrofaschismus”. In: Helmut Reinalter, ed.: Freimaurerei und europäischer Faschismus. Innsbruck, p. 52–69. Peters, Bruno (1986): Die Geschichte der Freimaurerei im Deutschen Reich 1870–1933. Berlin. Petricioli, Marta; Cherubini, Donatella; Anteghini, Alessandra, eds. (2004): Les Etats-Unis d’Europe. Un projet pacifiste / The United States of Europe. A Pacifist Project. Bern. Petricioli, Marta; Cherubini, Donatella, eds. (2007): Pour la paix en Europe. Institutions et société civile dans l’entre-deux-guerres. Brussels. Pfister, Eugen (2014): Europa im Bild. Imaginationen Europas in Wochenschauen in Deutschland, Frankreich, Großbritannien und Österreich 1948–1959. Göttingen. Pierrat, Emmanuel (2016): Les francs-maçons sous l’Occupation. Entre résistance et collaboration. Paris. Pistone, Sergio, ed. (1996): I Movimenti per l’Unità Europea 1954–1969. Atti del Convegno Internazionale, Genova, 5–7 novembre 1992. Pavia: Università di Pavia. Ploß, Christoph Johannes (2017): Die “New Commonwealth Society”. Ein Ideen-Laboratorium für den supranationalen europäischen Integrationsprozess. Stuttgart. Policar, Alain (2009): Célestin Bouglé. Paris. Popescu, Stefan (2004): Les Français et la République de Kortcha (1916–1920). In: Guerres mondiales et conflits contemporains, No 213, p. 77–87, DOI: 10.3917/gmcc.213.0077. Quetting, Michael (2007): Journalistin und Organisatorin, Friedensaktivistin und Nazigegnerin, die Nobelpreismacherin: Milly Zirker 1888–1971, https://www.rosalux.de/fileadmin/ls_saar/ image/veranstaltungen/Milly_Zirker_Datei.pdf. Ravelet, Claude, ed. (2008): Trois Figures de l’Ecole Durkheimienne: Célestin Bouglé, Georges Davy, Paul Fauconnet. Turin. Reinalter, Helmut, ed. (2009): Freimaurerei und europäischer Faschismus. Innsbruck. Reinfeldt, Alexander (2014): Unter Ausschluss der Öffentlichkeit? Akteure und Strategien supranationaler Informationspolitik in der Gründungsphase der europäischen Integration, 1952– 1972. Stuttgart. Renoliet, Jean-Jacques (1999): L’UNESCO oubliée. La Société des nations et la coopération intellectuelle (1919–1946). Paris (Publications de la Sorbonne, Série internationale, 59). Renoliet, Jean-Jacques (2007): La France et l’Organisation de Coopération Intellectuelle de la SDN. Entre unilatéralisme et multilatéralisme, 1919–1932. In: Bariéty, Jacques, ed.: Aristide Briand, la Société des Nations et l’Europe 1919–1932. Strasbourg, p. 237–250. Ries, Klaus, ed. (2016): Europa im Vormärz. Eine transnationale Spurensuche. Ostfildern. Sandu, Traian, ed. (2010): Vers un profil convergent des fascismes? “Nouveau consensus” et religion politique en Europe centrale. Paris.

Secondary Literature

187

Sauter, Max (1976): Churchills Schweizer Besuch 1946 und die Zürcher Rede. Herisau (Philosophical dissertation, University of Zurich). Schirmann, Sylvain, ed. (2003): Organisations internationales et architectures européennes (1929– 1939). Metz. Schmale, Wolfgang (2000): Geschichte Europas. Vienna. Schmale, Wolfgang (2009): Vom Homo Europaeus zum Homo Europeanus. Zur Debatte um den “europäischen Menschen” in den 1940er und 1950er Jahren. In: Bluche, Lorraine; Lipphardt, Veronika; Patel, Kiran Klaus, eds.: Der Europäer – Ein Konstrukt. Wissensbestände, Diskurse, Praktiken. Göttingen, p. 118–134. Schmale, Wolfgang (2011): Before Self-Reflexivity: Imperialism and Colonialism in the Early Discourses of European Integration. In: Wintle, Michael J.; Spiering, Menno, eds.: European Identity and the Second World War. Houndmills – New York, p. 186–203. Schmale, Wolfgang; Treiblmayr, Christopher (2015): Human Rights Leagues and Civil Society (1898 – ca. 1970s). In: Historische Mitteilungen, vol. 27, p. 186–208. Schmale, Wolfgang (2016): Gender and Eurocentrism. A Conceptual Approach to European History. Stuttgart. Schmale, Wolfgang; Treiblmayr, Christopher, eds. (2017): Human Rights Leagues in Europe (1898–2016). Stuttgart. Schmale, Wolfgang; Treiblmayr, Christopher (2017): The History of Human Rights Leagues. An Introduction. In: Schmale, Wolfgang; Treiblmayr, Christopher, eds.: Human Rights Leagues in Europe (1898–2016). Stuttgart, p. 15–31. Schmale, Wolfgang (2017): European Solidarity: A Semantic History. In: European Review of History, vol. 24, p. 854–873, DOI: 10.1080/13507486.2017.1345869. Schmale, Wolfgang (2018): Friedensinitiativen französischer Freimaurer in der Zwischenkriegszeit. In: Dingel, Irene; Paulmann, Johannes; Schnettger, Matthias; Wrede, Martin, eds.: Theatrum Belli – Theatrum Pacis. Konflikte und Konfliktregelungen im frühneuzeitlichen Europa. Göttingen, p. 277–284. Schmale, Wolfgang (2019): Legacy of the Enlightenment: The Use of European History and Culture in the Interwar Years by the Ligue des droits de l’homme and Grande Loge de France. In: History. Journal of The Historical Association, vol. 104, No 361, DOI: 10.1111/1468229X.12817. Schmitt, Oliver Jens (2016): Căpitan Codreanu. Aufstieg und Fall des rumänischen Faschistenführers. Vienna. Scholz, Werner (1996): Das deutsch-französische Verhältnis in den internationalen Kulturorganisationen der Zwischenkriegszeit. In: Baechler, Christian; Müller, Klaus-Jürgen, eds.: Les tiers dans les relations franco-allemandes / Dritte in den deutsch-französischen Beziehungen. Munich, p. 215–223. Schubert, Anselm; Pyta, Wolfram, eds. (2018): Die Heilige Allianz. Entstehung – Wirkung – Rezeption. Interdisziplinäre Tagung. Stuttgart. Schwelling, Birgit, ed. (2012): Reconciliation, Civil Society, and the Politics of Memory. Transnational Initiatives in the 20th and 21st Century. Bielefeld. Seligman, Adam B. (1995): The Idea of Civil Society. Princeton, NJ. Siedentop, Larry (2000): Democracy in Europe. London. Tavares Ribeiro, Maria Manuela; Freitas Valente, Isabel; Rollo, Maria Fernanda, eds. (2014): Pela paz! For peace! Pour la paix! (1849–1939). Brussels. Tornielli, Pablo (2015): Hombre de tres mundos. Para una biografía política e intelectual del emir Emín Arslán. In: Dirāsāt Hispānicas: Revista Tunecina de Estudios Hispánicos, No 2, p. 157– 181, https://dirasathispanicas.org/index.php/dirasathispanicas/article/view/35/html. Trebitsch, Michel (1994): Les revues européennes de l’entre-deux-guerres. In: Vingtième Siècle. Revue d’histoire, No 44: La culture politique en France depuis De Gaulle, p. 135–138, DOI: 10.3406/xxs.1994.3123.

188

Documentation

Treiblmayr, Christopher (2017): The Austrian League for Human Rights and its International Relations (1926–1938). In: Schmale, Wolfgang; Treiblmayr, Christopher, eds.: Human Rights Leagues in Europe (1898–2016). Stuttgart, p. 223–256. Vatri, Giuseppe M. (2012): Italian Freemasonry and Fascism. The Search for a Political Relation from Friendship to Defence (1922–1923). In: Papenheim, Martin, ed.: Italian and German Freemasonry in the Time of Fascism and National Socialism. Four Essays and a Comparative Introduction. Bayreuth (European Masonic Papers, 1), p. 17–47. Venzi, Fabio (2008): Massoneria e fascismo. Dall’intesa cordiale alla distruzione delle logge: come nasce una “guerra di religione”, 1921–1925. Rome. Vial, Eric (2017), The Lega italiana dei diritti dell’uomo (Italian Human Rights League). In: Schmale, Wolfgang; Treiblmayr, Christopher, eds.: Human Rights Leagues in Europe (1898– 2016). Stuttgart, p. 173–193. Vigni, Francesca; Vigni, Pier Domenico (1997): Donna e massoneria in Italia dalle origini ad oggi. Foggia. Wagnon, Sylvain (2018): De Condorcet à Decroly. La franc-maçonnerie belge, l’éducation et l’enseignement (XIXe–XXe). Brussels. Weiß, Christian (2005): “Soldaten des Friedens”. Die pazifistischen Veteranen und Kriegsopfer des “Reichsbundes” und ihre Kontakte zu den französischen anciens combattants 1919–1933. In: Hardtwig, Wolfgang, ed.: Politische Kulturgeschichte der Zwischenkriegszeit 1918–1939. Göttingen, p. 183–204. Weitz, Eric D. (2008): From the Vienna to the Paris System: International Politics and the Entangled Histories of Human Rights, Forced Deportations, and Civilizing Missions. In: American Historical Review, vol. 113, p. 1313–1343, DOI: 10.1086/ahr.113.5.1313. Wieviorka, Olivier; Romijn, Peter; Kott, Sandrine; Hoffmann, Stefan-Ludwig, eds. (2016): Seeking Peace in the Wake of War. Europe, 1943–1947. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press (NIOD Studies on War, Holocaust and Genocide, 2). Wildenthal, Lora (2017): The Reincarnations of the German League for Human Rights in Occupied and West Germany. In: Schmale, Wolfgang; Treiblmayr, Christopher, eds.: Human Rights Leagues in Europe (1898–2016). Stuttgart, p. 95–121. Wintle, Michael J.; Spiering, Menno, eds. (2011): European Identity and the Second World War. Houndmills – New York. Ziegerhofer-Prettenthaler, Anita (2004): Botschafter Europas. Richard Nikolaus CoudenhoveKalergi und die Paneuropa-Bewegung in den zwanziger und dreißiger Jahren. Vienna.

INDEX Aageness, S. L. 153 Aaron, Jean-Claude 134 Adenauer, Konrad 9 Adorno, Theodor W. 116 Albania 74, 114, 115 Albert Hall 11 Algeria 109, 162 Algiers 83 American Civil Liberties Union 85 Amsterdam 12 Anciens Combattants 133, 136 Anderson, E. H. 82 Anderson, James 33 Anderson, Ture 138 Andrássy (Count) 29 Arendt, Hannah 116 Argentina 44, 78 Arini Olympia 140 Aristotle 20 Armenia 36, 62, 78, 91 Armenian Genocide 91 Aron, Robert 14 Associated Country Women of the World 151 Association internationale des Académies 96 Association Internationale des Écrivains de Langue Française 96 Association Maçonnique Internationale 35, 36, 54 Association pour la paix par le droit 63 Atlantic Revolutions 20 Aulard, Alphonse 76, 91, 92, 93 Auschwitz 116, 134 Avxentieff, Nicolai 91 Babut, F. E. 72 Badbergen 147 Baldwin, Roger Nash 85 Balkans 21, 39, 64, 91 Balogh, Eugen 29 Barcelona 78 Barcia (Mr.) 73 Basch, Victor 64, 69, 73, 81, 87, 88, 92, 95, 99, 102, 107, 108, 109, 111

Batavus, Diderik see Bontkes, Tjark Eltjo Bayet, Albert 71 Beer, Max 105 Belgium 36, 39, 91 Beneš, Edvard 29 Bentham, Jeremy 52 Berlin 55, 130 Bernanos, Georges 148 Bernardin, Charles 29 Bethel, E. 91 Bethlen, István (count) 118, 119 Bitsanis, Frank 140, 142 Bluntschli, Johann Caspar 52 Bolívar, Simon 29 Bontkes 147 Bontkes, Tjark Eltjo 147 Borel, Émile 96 Borgese, G. A. 138 Bot, Yves 152 Bóta, Ernest 118, 119 Bouglé, Célestin 63, 64, 83 Boulogne-sur-Mer 41 Bourgeois, Léon 29 Brazil 44 Briand, Aristide 29, 101, 127 Brissot de Warville, Jacques Pierre 20 British Cab-Drivers Anti-Fascist Committee 120 British League of Nations Union 63 British National Council for Civil Liberties 79 Brooklyn 137 Brugmans, Hendrik 9 Brussels 11, 13, 21, 59, 162 Bucharest 91 Buchenwald (concentration camp) 47 Budapest 102 Buisson, Fernand 70, 109 Bulgaria 78, 91 Bund Neues Vaterland 71, 88, 112 Bureau International des Relations Maçonniques 35 Bureau of Jewish Social Research 85 Campolonghi, Luigi 30, 66, 71, 73

190 Camus, Albert 111 Carlsbad 35 Carnegie Foundation 64, 84 Carstens, Claus 138 Casablanca 48, 83 Cassin, René 68 Cassola-Campolonghi, Ernesta 77 Cavour (Count) 29 Centre culturel français (Berlin) 148 Centre international d’échanges culturels et sociaux 134 Cercles Fédéralistes et Socialistes pour les Etats-Unis d’Europe 97 Chad 112 Chadirat, Georges 55, 56 Challaye, Félicien 72 Charlemagne 128 Chile 111 China 64, 78, 133 Christiansson, Henning see Carstens, Claus Churchill, Winston Spencer 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 21, 29, 123, 125, chapter IV Cieker, José 152 Claudel, Paul 127 Cold War 12 Collège de France 117 Colpach 61 Comité Catholique des Amitiés Françaises à l’Etranger 105 Comité de défense de la race nègre 110 Commission d’éducation du Congrès de l’Union Internationale des Associations pour la Société des Nations 64 Commission d’Étude pour l’Union Européenne 97 Commission de l’Union Européenne 101, 102 Committee on Moral Disarmament 89 Comte, Auguste 53 Condorcet, Nicolas de 21 Congo 112 Congresses Congress of Europe, The Hague 1948 12, 13, 14, 15, 26, 97, 125, 130, 131, 162 Genoa conference, 1922 88 Pan-African Congress, Paris 1921 72 Peace Congress, Paris 1849 137, 138 Peace Congress, The Hague 1899 52 Constantine 83 Copenhagen 103 Costa Rica 44

Index Costa-Foru, Constantin G. 71, 91 Coudenhove-Kalergi, Richard Nikolaus von 16, 23, 29, 73, 81, 94, 95, 108, 125, 127, 129, 138, 144, 159 Council of Europe 13, 25, 125, 126, 127, 131, 133, 136, 152 Croiset, Alfred 64 Crucé, Eméric 52 Cuba 11 Curtis, Dunstan 130, 144, 151 Czechoslovakia 78, 90, 94 Dahomey 112 Dakar 83 Dante Alighieri 16 Danzig 78 Darmstadt 37 Daubenfeld (Grand Master) 57 De Almada Negreiros 91, 97, 98 Deel, Robert 91, 94 Dégremont, Etienne 48 Dehler, Thomas 29 Delaisi, Francis 50, 102 Delbos, Yvon 105 Delbosc, H. 55 Delpech, Auguste 29 Demokratische Flüchtlingsfürsorge 77 Denmark 86 Deraismes, Maria 34 Djibouti 112 Döblin, Alfred 105 Dodge, David L. 21 Dohet, P. 144 Don Quichote 68 Dorland Hall 12 Dottor, René C. 136 Doumer, Paul 29 Doumergue, Gaston 45 Dreyfus affair 22, 59, 79 Dub, Leo 151 Dubois, Pierre 52 Ducommun, Élie 41 Dulles, Allen 151 Dumont-Wilden, Louis 96 Durkheim, Émile 64 Éboué, Felix 29 École des Hautes-Etudes 71 École Normale Supérieure 50, 64, 83 Egypt 62, 78 Ehrlich, Paul 120 Einstein, Albert 63, 71, 120

191

Index Ekebybruk 138 Emín Arslán (Emir) 111 Engländer, Heinrich 30 Épinal 135 Erasmus of Rotterdam 16 Erdmann, Viktor 127 Esperanto 41, 101, 103 Etat français (Vichy) 80, 128 Eubé, Charles 133 Europäische Akademie Schlüchtern 143 Europa-Union 127, 131, 138 European Coal and Steel Community 13 European Communities 14 European Economic Community 13, 128 European Movement (International) 13, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 133, 134, 136, 147, 151, 158, 159 European Recovery Programme 137 Federal Union 153 Fédération française des Associations pour la S.D.N. 101 Fédération Internationale des Amies de la Jeune Fille 151 Fédération Internationale Maçonnique pour la Société des Nations 36, 48 Federmann, Ernst 149 Ferguson, Adam 20 Ferry, Jules 53 Filene, Edward Albert 50 Foreign Office Berlin 144 Fornaro, Angelo 135, 153 France libre 112 Franco, Francisco 38, 152 François-Poncet, André 130 Francq (Mr.) 89 Frankfurter Gesellschaft 127 French India 112 French Revolution 20 Freud, Sigmund 120 Fried, Alfred Hermann 29, 120 Fustel de Coulanges, Numa Denis 96 Gabon 112 Gambetta, Léon 29 Ganev, Venelin 91 Garibaldi, Giuseppe 29, 37 Gastinel, Pierre 65 Gaulle, Charles de 9, 112 Gearon, Mary Elisabeth 137 Geneva 21, 25, 35, 36, 41, 77, 80 Genoa 88

George VI (king) 29 Georgia 78, 90 German Confederation 52 Giese, Margarete 144, 145 Gladstone, William 148 Glaser, Ernst 132, 144, 146 Goebbels, Joseph 120, 132 Goldscheid, Rudolf 30, 60, 69, 85, 86, 90, 91, 94, 98 Gollancz, Victor 139 Gollwitzer, Heinz 16 Göring, Hermann 120 Gothenburg 138 Gothon-Lunion, Joseph 110 Graf, Oscar Maria 105 Gramsci, Antonio 20, 71 Grasse 152 Gratz, Gustav 29 Greece 78, 91, 140 Greenwood, Arthur 29 Grégoire, Alfred 137 Grossmann, Kurt 77, 107 Grotius, Hugo 52 Guérard, Albert Léon 138 Guernut, Henri 85, 91, 100, 109, 110, 112 Guizot, François 96, 113 Gurs-camp (Pyrenees) 80 Guyana 112 Guyot, Yves 29 Haakon VII (king) 39 Haase, Rolf 147 Hafen, Gallus 152 Hagemann, Marie-Luise 127 Haifa 79 Haiti 78, 91 Hallstein, Walter 127 Hamburg 84, 131, 143 Hamburgisches Welt-Wirtschafts-Archiv (Zentralstelle des Hamburgischen Kolonialinstituts) 84 Hanoi 47 Heerfordt, Christian Frederik 86, 100 Hegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich 20, 96 Hermann, Lilo 77 Herriot, Edouard 57 Hertz, Frederick 102 Heyman, Aage 103, 104 High Commissioner of the League of Nations for German Refugees 77 Hill, David Jayne 57 Hinden, E. 79

192

Index

Hitler, Adolf 55, 57, 105, 122, 120, 130 Hofmann, Friedrich Herbert 127 Hohenstein (Mr.) 108 Holy Alliance 52 Holy Roman Empire 142 Horkheimer, Max 64 Huber-Wiesenthal, Rudolf 30 Hugo, Victor 16, 21, 49, 52, 92, 127, 137, 138, 159 Hungary 79, 91, 118 Hus, Jan 90

Kellerson, Germaine 105 Kemnitzer, Hans-Georg 132, 148 Khatissian, Alexandre 91 Kirchhoff, Günther 128 Kleiber, Fritz 143 Koblenz 80 Kogon, Eugen 130 Kohn, Fritz S. 30 Kolb, Anette 105 Korean War 139 Kuczynski, Robert 91, 95, 98

Ido 101, 103 Imperial War Graves Commission 122 Indochina 112 Institut Economique Européen de Bruxelles 102 Institut für Auswärtige Politik 84 International Alliance of Women 151 International Commission on Intellectual Co-operation 63, 64, 71, 89 International Council of the European Movement 162 International Council of Women 151 International Court (The Hague) 52 International Federation of League of Nations Societies 60, 63 International Institute of Intellectual Co-operation 74 International Labour Organization 50 International League for Peace and Freedom 21 International League for the Rights of Man (New York) 59, 85 International Union of League of Nations Associations 87

Lafont, Ernest 110 Lagrange, Léo 105 Lamprecht, Karl 96 Langevin, Paul 109 Lanzenberger, Ed. 131, 133 Latin America 33 Lausanne 34 Le Droit Humain 34 Le Foyer, Lucien 49 League for the Defence of the Women’s Interests 61 League for the Rights of Man (Tel Aviv et al.) 62, 79 League of Anti-Semites 22 League of Nations 13, 18, 21, 22, 24, 35, 36, 44, 48, 49, 52, 57, 60, 75, 82, 86, 101, 108, 158 League of Patriots 22 Lehmann-Rußbüldt, Otto 71, 88, 89, 104, 105, 112 Lemonnier, Charles 41, 92 Lenard, Julian M. 30 Lepeytre, Henry 135 Leroy-Beaulieu, Anatole 57 Leuschner, Wilhelm 29 Leuze 80 Lichtenberger, Henri 121 Lier 138 Liga für den Völkerbund 127 Ligue (internationale) de la paix et la liberté 41 Ligue pour la défense des droits de l’homme et du citoyen 22 Lilienfeld, Jakob Heinrich von 52 Lille 29, 50 Lindskog, Karin 139 Lipgens, Walter 17, 130 Lips, Otto 130, 150 Locke, John 20 London 11, 21, 125, 139

Jacques, Jean-Louis 136 Jerusalem 79 Joffre (Maréchal) 29 Johnson, Willard 151 Joint Committee of Shanghai Women’s Organizations 139 Jouvenel, Bertrand de 57 Jouvenel, Henry de 63, 97 Junot, Michel 134 Kahn, Émile 62, 74, 90 Kant, Immanuel 16, 20, 52, 92 Karolyi, Michel (count) 91, 95 Katsiardi-Hering, Olga 140 Kayser, Jacques 102

193

Index Loth, Wilfried 17 Loucheur, Louis Albert Joseph 94 Löwenthal, Leo 116 Ludwig, Emil 105 Ludwigshafen 80 Luxemburg 39, 62, 79, 91 Macron, Emmanuel 162 Madagascar 112 Madariaga, Salvador de 70 Madrid 152 Maghreb 111, 112 Maier, Reinhold 29 Mainz 80 Makris, G. 71 Malinowska, Valetta 117 Malinowski, Bronisław 117 Mangin, Robert 97 Mann, Thomas 130, 138 Marabini, Francesco 135 Maréchal, Jacques 55, 56 Marshall Plan 133 Martin, Gaston 34 Martin, T. B. 151 Martinique 112 Marx, Karl 20 Mary, Raoul 110 Masaryk, Tomáš Garrigue 29, 94 Maurette, Fernand 50, 51 Mayreder, Rosa 77 Mayrisch circle 23 Mayrisch, Emile 61 Mazzini, Giuseppe 127, 135 McMahon, Sir Arthur Henry 29 Męczkowska, Teodora 77 Mehring, Walter 105 Meknès 144 Ménard-Dorian, Aline 61, 62, 77, 90, 111 Mendelssohn-Bartholdy, Albrecht 84 Menton 80 Metz 12 Mexico 111 Miltenberg am Main 130 Mink (Mr.) 90 Mintz, Alexander 30 Mirkin-Getzevich, Boris 84, 100 Moch, Gaston 53 Moeslinger, August 135 Monier, Maurice 29, 35, 53 Monnet, Jean 9, 16, 125 Montesquieu, Charles de Secondat, baron de 20

Montevideo 84 Morhardt, Mathias 29 Morocco 46, 94, 112, 144 Mounier, Emmanuel 105 Mouvement de Graal, France 137 Mulhouse 152 Müller, H. C. 95 Munich 17, 144 Music Academy of Strasbourg 137 Nancy 136 National Council for Civil Liberties 62, 79, 107 National Society for Women’s Suffrage 21 Natoli, Aurelio 71 Nazi youth movement 138 Netter, Colette 134 Neuchâtel 35 New Commonwealth Society 156 New York 140 New York Peace Society 21 New York Public Library 82 Nicholas II (Tsar) 52 Nietzsche, Friedrich 53 Nîmes 63 Noirel, Madeleine 144 Norway 79, 138 Nouvelles-Hébrides 83 Nuremberg Trials 134 Océane 112 Oekonomos, S. 91 Office Franco-Allemand d’Information et de Documentation 61 Okuyama, Seiji 83 Oran 83 Organisation professionnelle internationale pour la défense des libertés académiques et des droits des savants 64 Organization of American States 87 Ortega y Gasset, José 91, 121, 128 Oslo 153 Ossietzky, Carl von 29, 61, 70 Painlevé, Paul 50 Palestine 79 Pan-European Union 23, see also Coudenhove-Kalergi, Richard Nikolaus von Pareto, Vilfredo 71 Paris 21, 72, 137, 138 Patek, Stanisław 71 Paul-Boncour, Joseph 97, 105

194 Pelzer, Robert 30 Pen Club 96 Perrier, Léon 45 Pétain, Philippe (Maréchal) 38, 80, 128, 134 Picard, Roger 95, 98 Podiebrad, George (Czech king) 52 Poland 79, 91 Port-au-Prince 79 Portugal 44, 79, 91 Posner, S. 91 Posner, Stanisław 30 Prague 78, 107 Preuschen, C. Freiherr von 127 Prudhommeaux, Jules 79, 83, 95, 101 Pulse of Europe 14 Quartier-La-Tente, Édouard 35 Quidde, Ludwig 71 Reclus, Paul 29 Reinach, Joseph 29 Renaudel (Mr.) 94 Résistance 133, 134, 136, 144 Réunion 112 Reynold, Gonzague de 75, 120 Riandey, Charles 53, 55, 56 Ribas, Fabra 111 Ribeaupierre, J. 81 Richer, Léon 34 Richet, Charles 29 Richter, Elise 70, 71, 77 Rif War 94 Ripert (Mr.) 89, 90 Rolland, Romain 72 Romania 79, 91 Romanian Committee on Intellectual Co-operation 74 Rome 36 Rome Treaty 9 Roosevelt, Franklin D. 140 Rosenberg, James N. 151 Rousseau, Jean-Jacques 16, 52 Rubinstein, Jacob L. 84 Rumpler, Siegfried Norbert 30 Russia 36, 62, 79 Rustad, Einar F. 138 Ruyssen, Théodore 63, 100, 101, 113, 114 Saget, Henri 144 Saigon 83 Saint-Hubert, Aline de 61

Index Saint-Pierre, Charles Irénée Castel, abbé de 16, 52 Saint-Simon, Henri de 16, 92 Sandys, Duncan 125 Scandinavian Women’s Association 139 Scandinavian Women’s Association in Shanghai 139 Schacht, Hjalmar 29 Schiller, Friedrich 120 Schuman, Robert 9, 128, 133, 136 Sée, Henri 100 Seipel, Ignaz 92 Sénégal 112 Serbia 44 Shanghai 139 Sharashidze, Datiko 90 Simarro, Luis 30 Smith,Adam 20 Société des Amis des Noirs 21 Société du Suffrage des Femmes 21 Society for Scandinavian Cooperation and Friendship 138 Spengler, Oswald 121, 129, 143, 159 Spenle, JP. 152 Spinelli, Altiero 9, 125, 159 St. Gallen 152 Stempowski, St. 35 Stern-Rubarth, Edgar 57 Stevens, Henry Herbert 29 Stockholm 144 Strasbourg 127, 136 Streicher, Julius 120 Streit, Clarence 153 Stresemann, Gustav 29 Stuttgart 77, 119 Sully (Maximilien de Béthune, duc de Sully) 16, 52 Süss, Wilhelm 37 Svolos, Alexandros 70 Sweden 133, 138 Swiss Committee on Intellectual Co-operation 75 Switzerland 11, 41 Sylvestre, Louis 47 Szende, Paul 29 Tandler, Julius 29 Tel Aviv 62, 79 The Hague 11, 12, 14, 15, 26, 52, 97, 130, 131, 162 Thiers, Adolphe 96 Thompson, Dorothy 130

195

Index Thoring 128 Thugutt, Stanisław 71 Tirana 78 Tirpitz, Alfred von 29 Țițeica, Gheorghe 74 Tocqueville, Alexis de 20, 155 Togo 83, 112 Tokyo 83 Toulon 144 Tower, Sir Reginald 29 Toynbee, Arnold 64 Trarieux, Ludovic 22 Trauttmansdorff, Dr. (Graf zu) 143 Treitschke, Heinrich von 96 Triaca, Ubaldo 90, 95, 98 Trier 80 Troeltsch, Ernst 69 Tunis 112 Tunisia 76, 112 Turkey 78, 91

New York University 138 Sorbonne 64 Stanford University 138 Université de Paris 64 University of Halle 102 Zurich University 11 Unruh, Fritz von 105 Uruguay 11, 84 USA 11, 44, 60

Unamuno, Miguel 70, 91 Union Franco-Allemande 105 Union Internationale des Ligues Féminines Catholiques 151 Union of Democratic Control 79, 91, 94 Union Syndicale des Techniciens de l’Industrie, du Commerce et de l’Agriculture 89 United Kingdom 25 United States Committee for a United Nations Genocide Convention 151 United States of Europe Association Inc. 140 United States of the North 157 Universala Framasona Ligo 41 Universities Central University of Madrid 30 Columbia University 116 European University Institute 125 Johann Wolfgang von Goethe Universität Frankfurt am Main 127

Waechter, Sir Max 95 Waffen-SS 128, 133 Wales 39 Weil, Gaston 46, 47, 54 Wellhoff, Bernard 29, 35, 36 Werfel, Franz 105 Weychert-Szymanowska, Władysława 77 Wiesbaden 80 Wilmotte, Maurice 91, 96, 98 Wilson, Woodrow 44, 52 Winter, Karl 30 Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom 62, 151 World Council of Churches 25

Vacaresco, Hélène 97 Valéry, Paul 97 Veil, Simone 159 Vermeil, Edmond 121 Versailles 21, 152 Vichy 38, 72, 134, 136 Vienna 107, 130 Vintimille 80 Visser ’t Hooft, Willem 25 Volksgerichtshof 77, 119

Yugoslavia 36, 79 Zirker, Milly 61, 62, 77, 80, 81, 82

studien zur geschichte der europäischen integration studies on the history of european integration études sur l ’ histoire de l ’ integration européenne

Herausgegeben von / Edited by / Dirigé par Jürgen Elvert.

Franz Steiner Verlag

ISSN 1868–6214

22. Joachim Beck / Birte Wassenberg (Hg.) Grenzüberschreitende Zusammenarbeit leben und erforschen. Bd. 5: Integration und (trans-)regionale Identitäten Beiträge aus dem Kolloquium „Grenzen überbrücken: auf dem Weg zur territorialen Kohäsion in Europa“, 18. und 19. Oktober 2010, Straßburg 2013. 353 S. mit 23 Abb. und 7 Ktn, kt. ISBN 978-3-515-10595-8 23. Kristin Reichel Dimensionen der (Un-)Gleichheit Geschlechtsspezifische Ungleichheiten in den sozial- und beschäftigungspolitischen Debatten der EWG in den 1960er Jahren 2014. 273 S., kt. ISBN 978-3-515-10776-1 24. Kristian Steinnes The British Labour Party, Transnational Influences and European Community Membership, 1960–1973 2014. 217 S., kt. ISBN 978-3-515-10775-4 25. Yves Clairmont Vom europäischen Verbindungsbüro zur transnationalen Gewerkschaftsorganisation Organisation, Strategien und Machtpotentiale des Europäischen Metallgewerkschaftsbundes bis 1990 2014. 505 S. mit 18 Tab und 2 Farbabb., kt. ISBN 978-3-515-10852-2 26. Joachim Beck / Birte Wassenberg (Hg.) Vivre et penser la coopération transfrontalière. Vol. 6: Vers une cohésion territoriale? Contributions du cycle de recherche sur la coopération transfrontalière de l'Université de Strasbourg et l'Euro-Institut 2014. 377 S. mit 38 Abb., kt. ISBN 978-3-515-10964-2

27.

28.

29.

30.

31.

32.

Patrick Moreau / Birte Wassenberg (Hg.) European Integration and new Anti-Europeanism I The 2014 European Election and the Rise of Euroscepticism in Western Europe 2016. 212 S. mit 33 Tab. und 21 Abb., kt. ISBN 978-3-515-11253-6 Patrick Moreau / Birte Wassenberg (Hg.) European Integration and new Anti-Europeanism II The 2014 European Election and New AntiEuropean Forces in Southern, Northern and Eastern Europe 2016. 239 S. mit 99 Tab. und 5 Abb., kt. ISBN 978-3-515-11455-4 Wolfgang Schmale Gender and Eurocentrism A Conceptual Approach to European History 2016. 214 S., kt. ISBN 978-3-515-11461-5 Martial Libera / Sylvain Schirmann / Birte Wassenberg (Hg.) Abstentionnisme, euroscepticisme et anti-européisme dans les élections européennes de 1979 à nos jours 2016. 246 S. mit 18 Tab. und 19 Abb., kt. ISBN 978-3-515-11251-2 Partrick Moreau / Birte Wassenberg (Hg.) European Integration and new AntiEuropeanism III Perceptions of External States on European Integration 2017. 184 S. mit 5 Tab., kt. ISBN 978-3-515-11252-9 Birte Wassenberg (Hg.) Castle-talks on Cross-Border Cooperation Fear of Integration? The Pertinence of the Border 2018. 452 S. mit 23 Abb. und 6 Tab., kt. ISBN 978-3-515-12008-1

The idea of a “United States of Europe” was revived during the European Parliament elections in May 2019. However, the idea dates back to the early 19th century while being particularly popular in the first half of the 20th century. It focused on how European integration is related to democracy and human rights. The main player was civil society, including, in the inter-war period, the interconnected human rights leagues and Masons. The resistance in World War II carried the idea forward. It reached its peak popularity between 1946 and 1951, when Winston Churchill pleaded in

favour of a “United States of Europe”. This caused many people to write to him and those letters provide insights into the concept of a European unity from an individual point of view. This book is based on the analysis of extensive archive material of Masons, human rights leagues and those letters to Churchill. It enhances critical research on the idea of Europe and its civil society base. It also takes a fresh look at Masons, human rights leagues and at the interconnections between the notions of Europe and civilization.

www.steiner-verlag.de Franz Steiner Verlag

ISBN 978-3-515-12464-5

9

7835 1 5 1 24645