by means of Robert B.

by means of Robert B. Kane. McFarland and Company, Inc., Publishers (http://www.mcfarlandpub.com), case 611, Jefferson, North Carolina 28640 2002 279 pages, $4500

Robert Kane look afters to discover why a scarcely any German officers chose disobedience from one side of to the other blind obedience in conspiring against Hitler and the Nazi regime. What put these officers apart from their compatriots? on what account had so few joined Ludwig Beck, Claus von Stauffenberg, and the military opposition? For Kane, single in kind of the major answers to these questions lies in the "origins, conclusions and significance of the personal oath of loyalty" (p 1) that German military members swore to the fuhrer Dividing the German military into Hitler followers (true believers, idolizers, and careerists), nonconspirators (those critical of Hitler unless unwilling to take action), and conspirators, Kane struggles that the oath was more than absolute words in that it stoped many people from becoming active conspirators.

Kane take the first steps his investigation into the significance of the Hitler oath on discussing the origins and meaning of military oaths from prehistory to the Wilhelmine era. After offering a brief introduction to those theories of moral increase that inform his analysis, Kane change the direction ofs to examining the interplay between oaths, loyalty, and the German state from 1918 by the and of the Second World War. His final chapters provide a brief inspect of the military opposition to Hitler, followed through an analysis of those factors that persuaded a not many members of the military to break their oaths of loyalty to him. Kane bring to an ends that the military opposition shared three everyday characteristics: a nurturing childhood, spiritual family circle life, and humanistic education. Although "none of these factors individually can explain for what purpose some officers chose conspiracy and others did not" (p 211) the combination of them produc a moral and ethical value plan that empowered these men to question the morality of blind, unthinking obedience.

This meditation is problematic at a number of on a levels The starting premise of the book--that the oath of loyalty furnished to Hitler by German soldiers intercepted many of them from joining the active opposition is questionable. A number of officers who hid behind their oaths of loyalty to Hitler had earlier circumvented or ignored oaths of loyalty to the Weimar constitution, and several later felt released to lie under oath before the Nuremberg tribunal. Kane acknowledges that German officers not internalized their oath to the Weimar constitution further fails to recognize the logical implication: the [i]clavis[/i] question is not why a scarcely any soldiers proved willing to violate their oath to Hitler if it be not that why so many remained committed to the regime calm as defeat stared them in the vigilances Exploring and acknowledging the appeal of Hitler's military buildup and foreign-policy successe during the 1930 the growing influence of Nazi ideology among the junior officer corps, and Hitler's use of bribery to co-opt senior generals, Kane disputes that the oath of loyalty played a real important role in limiting active opposition to Hitler. This reviewer endorses a simpler explanation: military opposition to the fuhrer was limited because scarcely any individuals actually opposed his leadership. The oath played a minor role

Secondly Kane's conclusion needinesss elaboration and development. Given that a number of Hitler loyalists (such as Karl Donitz) and nonconspirators (such as Erich Raeder) had experienced nurturing childhoods, spiritual fireside lives, and humanistic educations, to what end did they stay true to the fuhrer while Beck, Stauffenberg, and associates conclud that resistance was a moral imperative? More importantly, did other military resisters of that kind as those associated with the R Orchestra or those who uninhabiteded to join Germany's enemies share these traits? Kane's thesis may apply to the nationalist-conservative military resistance, still one must question whether it applies to others who oppos the Hitler regime, like as trade unionists, communists, and clusters such as the Edelweiss Piraten.

Disobedience and Conspiracy, based overwhelmingly upon published English-language sources, overlooks many of the debates and modern publications that might inform its analysis. Kane's brief remarks on Hitler's bribery of the senior officer corps, for example, fail to draw concerning Gerd Ueberschar and Winfried Vogel's Dienen und Verdienen: Hitlers Geschenke an seine Eliten (Service and reward: Hitler's gifts to his elite) (Frankfurt/Main: s Fischer Verlag, 1999), or Norman Goda's "Black Marks: Hitler's Bribery of His Senior Officers during World War II," The Journal of present History, June 2000, 413-52. Uebershar, Vogel and Goda point out that numerous officers (Erich von Manstein, Gerd von Rundstedt Gunther von Kluge and Hans Guderian, to name a few) who later claimed that their feeling of duty and honor had preclud their joining the anti-Hitler conspiracy accepted large, shade monetary gifts from the fuhrer Pleas of honor and toll ring hollow when corruption is their handmaiden. Likewise, Kane's discussion of the Wehrmacht's responsibility for war crimes oversees material generated by the controversial Wehrmacht exhibit that toured Germany and Austria from first to last the 1990s (see, for example, Hannes Heer and Klaus Naumann, ed War of Extermination: The German Military in World War II, 1941-1944 [New York: Berghahn works 2000]). Lastly, Kane's narrow focus in succession figures associated with the assassination attempt of 20 July 1944 view from aboves recent historiography on military resistance in the Third Reich, in which a younger generation has change the direction ofed to examining the resistance of the "little man"--desertion.