Strong foundations
We have a sign of hope. It reveals that when we have done all that is humanly possible, there is still something else we can do – something that cannot be touched and is eternal. (Hermann Krings)
A little over fifteen years ago, I lived in a nice, modest home in Lehi, Utah, in a brand new subdivision. I was the first tenant in this home. That meant front yard still had not been sodded. In Utah, developers don’t worry about back yards. Just front yards, for appearance’s sake.
It took them almost a month to take care of that lawn. I watched as they slapped paint on expensive houses up and down the street, planting trees that didn’t seem to have enough room for their roots.
But I was starting a new job so had little time to worry about grass in the front yard.
This was around the time that the phrase “affinity fraud” became a cliché in the USA. Not because of widespread criminal behavior, but because of Bernie Madoff. As anyone who read newspapers at that time knows, Bernie Madoff ripped off many influential friends and associates, all wealthy, almost all Jewish. Steven Spielberg was probably the most prominent victim.
While the world focused on Bernie’s misdeeds, affinity fraud was taking shape in Utah on an even wider basis. It primarily involved real estate. Mortgage fraud was front and center, and most victims were members of the same wards or stakes as the person committing that fraud.
There was a second tier to this particular affinity fraud, however. Unbeknownst to me, the house I was renting was smack dab in Ground Zero of this tier.
We heard rumors that developers had knowingly contracted with individuals or companies who quoted low rates, because they were using substandard materials. Developers allegedly knew this, but since the lower quotes improved their bottom line, they signed off on the invoices. Local news covered it, somewhat, not extensively.
Before long, within a matter of a few months, I began to see clear evidence of what that meant. When I would go for a walk in the neighborhood, I saw steps or front porches pulling away from the fronts of houses. Driveways and sidewalks turned to powder, almost overnight.
In my basement, a long, disturbing, and very wide crack appeared from the front of the house to the back. This was not normal settling. I was witnessing what those reporters wondered about.
I left Utah before the criminal investigation got underway. No idea whether anyone paid for violating building codes – and trust. Because, unlike the Bernie Madoff case that had nationwide coverage, this incident barely rated mention on local news. I doubt anyone outside Utah ever knew about it. I’ve wondered how those developers could sit in long Sunday services in their LDS ward, knowing that people in the same pew had bought homes from them, relying on them to have done things right, to have purchased good grade materials, to have followed regulations and laws.
When recording the first three chapters of White Rose History, Volume II, I realized that for people who’ve never heard of White Rose resistance, or who only know its basics, these three chapters may feel a bit… boring? I’m talking about the Natural Sciences department at the university in Munich, and the knock down drag out fight between its department head Friedrich von Faber and the faculty senate, helmed by Bruno Thüring. Why talk about Constantin Carathéodory and Arnold Sommerfeld?
Or Alfred von Martin? Who cares about Dr. Muth’s friends? You want to read the White Rose story. Josef Furtmeier, yes, you know he was there, sort of, blending into the background at readings and discussions. But again, why should you care?
And why am I talking about Katharina Schüddekopf and Josef Söhngen and the minutiae of Professor Kurt Huber’s life? Shouldn’t I be getting on with the story?
If you can be patient and hang in there through June 17, 2024, it will gradually become clearer to you. This is that foundation of the story. I’m not using defective concrete or planting trees too shallow. This story is too important for shortcuts.
Alfred von Martin’s words show up in Sophie Scholl’s contemplations about Nature’s need of redemption. Willi Graf was friends with, and influenced by, a person who adhered to Alfred von Martin’s ecumenical drive (we need more research on the connection between Georg Thurmair and Alfred von Martin!) Christoph Probst envied Hans Scholl his personal friendship with Martin, because he wanted to talk to Martin about his understanding of humanism. Josef and Erika Rieck gave Otl Aicher a copy of Martin’s Nietzsche and Schopenhauer book and called it “a day of reckoning against the Third Reich.”
And Hans Scholl was supposed to have tea with Alfred von Martin… on February 19, 1943. A date he could not keep.
That is simply one example from the “boring” section of the book, the chapters that lay this strong foundation. When writing this book in 2002, I did not have to explain people like Willi Graf and Alexander Schmorell and Christoph Probst in such painful detail. Although Inge Scholl minimized their contributions to White Rose work in her legendary telling of the story, at least readers knew who they were. Not so with Alfred von Martin and Constantin Carathéodory and Josef Furtmeier. And Arnold Sommerfeld, who had connections both to White Rose and to the so-called Rote Kapelle – and the Harnacks – in Berlin.
And Katharina Schüddekopf.
Käthe got her own extended section in the June 12 podcast because not only has her contribution been minimized, she’s been all but written out of White Rose history. Yet without Käthe? I cannot imagine White Rose resistance without that courageous young woman. She was a primary link to Professor Kurt Huber, as he genuinely was her Doktorvater. Käthe was the person who saved the leaflet that Traute used for recruitment. Käthe was front and center in the debates over the efficacy of leaflets. Käthe’s physical disability had to have reminded the friends - daily - of Nazi attitudes towards those who could not fully contribute to society (in their opinion) because they were physically or mentally “imperfect.”
And Käthe was the only person besides Alexander Schmorell to call out Hans Scholl on his abominable treatment of Traute Lafrenz. That alone clued me in to her importance in this group. Someone who wasn’t cowed by Hans Scholl!
So – if you wonder about the minutiae, if you think the back stories don’t apply to White Rose work, bear with me. It will start to make sense once the narrative picks up with their lives and work in Chapter Four, i.e., on June 18, 2024.
Ask yourself why so many writers left out Alfred von Martin, the Natural Sciences people, Käthe, Josef Furtmeier, Josef Söhngen as Hans’ true love. Ask yourself why it’s necessary for me to devote this much time and energy to laying this strong foundation. Ask yourself what Inge Scholl and so-called scholars have gained by omitting these people in favor of Hans and Sophie Scholl alone.
Adding in the people who made up this circle does not detract from the heroism of Hans and Sophie Scholl. Rather, it fleshes out the who, what, when, where… and WHY.
Two additional points of order that may help you as you progress further and further into this very true, very heart-breaking, and inspiring story.
First, since these first three chapters are foundational, I’m extending the “free” podcasts through Chapter Four.
Second, as I add these podcasts to daily Substack “Notes,” I will be commenting on the relevance of that particular segment to our lives in 2024. As I’ve noted before, I’m avoiding politics. My comments are not red-blue, Democrat-Republican, CSU-SPD. The comments will focus on justice. On liberty and freedom. On the rule of law. On the corruption of religion, regardless of the faith. On the dynamics of power. On informed dissent. On war versus peace. On diplomacy. On Otherness. On personal responsibility.
Remember that this book was researched from July 1994 through January 2001. Written in 2001. And published in 2002. 9/11 hit us as a nation when I was about halfway through the eighth and final draft. (Yes, there were seven drafts before this one.) When this book was published, we were not yet fighting in Iraq or Afghanistan.
It is therefore important to me, as author of this book, as someone who cares deeply about the lives and deaths of these young people and the adults who joined them in their fight, that we understand that their story matters regardless of era. Regardless of who sits in the White House or in Berlin or in the Knesset or in the Palace of Westminster. Or in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania; Austin, Texas; Tallahassee, Florida; Sacramento, California; or, Carson City, Nevada. Or in your local mayor’s office.
Their story matters, because it calls us to act justly, to live humbly.
In the words of Hermann Krings, friend of Willi Graf:
“The sign of the White Rose can be understood as an example. But an example does not consist only of the virtuous actions of an individual, rather it includes an appropriate environment. Those days were not days for an action that could serve as an example. What they did was not exemplary. At best, what they did was something that an individual living in an evil time could personally justify or what he believed he must do.
“Even this was not possible without living a lie day in, day out. This action that was supposed to resist evil can hardly be put forward as exemplary. To hide oneself daily, to keep silent, to lie, to conceal things even from friends, in order one day to break out, and finally, to be ready to die – this cannot be understood as exemplary.
“Such a breaking-out is a sign. It is the sign of an unbroken spirit, but it is also the sign of an evil time. It is a light in the darkness.
“But this sign may not serve as an alibi for Germans. Neither the death of Hans Scholl and his friends, nor the deaths of those associated with the July 20, 1944 resistance, may be used as a sign to say the German people were not so bad.
“Rather, this sign says how bad they really were. This death is a sign that points to the thousands upon thousands of deaths caused by this regime, that points even to the not-public deaths, such as those driven to their deaths in prisons and concentration camps, yes, even to the 364 soldiers who were condemned and executed after their court-martial at the valley by Stalingrad.
“I am speaking of an evil time. For that person who was trapped in primitive thoughts and driven by hate, that person who rose to become head of State and dictator in Germany, did not stand alone. He had around him a whole hierarchy of unscrupulous functionaries who served the power apparatus and instruments of terror.
“And finally, he was supported by many in the land who consumed National Socialism as a political and psychic narcotic. Jeremiah did not oppose only the kings, priests, and prophets, but also ‘the people of the land.’ The first leaflet of the White Rose spoke of a ‘spiritless and cowardly mass.’ The whole was bad, and not only bad, but evil.
“On February 22, 1943, Hans Scholl, Sophie Scholl, and Christoph Probst were executed. On July 13, Alexander Schmorell and Kurt Huber. On October 12, Willi Graf (and two years later, Hans Leipelt). This resistance, born witness to in death, is a sign for the victory over evil, as far as it is possible to conquer evil in our earthly existence. It is not reason for enthusiasm, but it is grounds for hope.
“We should take hope with us and leave the example behind. The example leads to misunderstandings. How are we to see an example in resistance that ended in death? We must search for new rules and better forms for our lives. Possibly we will even seek political alternatives. But that is the exception. Certainly any one of us could be subjected to that exception – then he will recall possible examples, if he has enough time.
“The White Rose is a sign. The death of the friends is a sign. Signs are hard to read. But no matter how we read this sign, we have a sign of hope. It reveals that when we have done all that is humanly possible, there is still something else we can do – something that cannot be touched and is eternal.” (Hermann Krings, “Das Zeichen der Weiβen Rose: Zur politischen Bedeutung des studentischen Widerstands.” In Stimmen, Issue 5, Vol. 201. Freiburg: Verlag Herder, May 1983.)
We have a sign of hope. It reveals that when we have done all that is humanly possible, there is still something else we can do – something that cannot be touched and is eternal.
That is Why This Matters. Today, perhaps more than in 2002, we need this sign of hope as we struggle to do all that is humanly possible to ensure that justice prevails.
© 2024 Denise Elaine Heap. Please contact us for permission to quote. To order digital version of White Rose History, Volume II, click here. Digital version of White Rose History, Volume I is available here.