This article follows on from Nazi Economic Policy and Rearmament 1933-39
Introduction
From the moment Hitler assumed power in 1933, the Nazi regime set about reshaping German society to align with its racial and ideological goals. Central to this project was the concept of the Volksgemeinschaft—a racially pure “people’s community” that demanded both unity and exclusion. Social policies between 1933 and 1939 were aimed at creating a cohesive, obedient national body that could serve the twin ambitions of internal purification and external expansion. These policies touched every aspect of German life, from education and labour to family, leisure, and race.
This article explores the scope and intent of Nazi social policy in this formative period, revealing the mechanics of control, the cultivation of popular consent, and the brutal logic of exclusion. It also examines major historiographical debates on the nature of the Nazi regime—especially the extent to which ordinary Germans supported or resisted its goals.
The Volksgemeinschaft: An Ideological Blueprint
At the centre of all Nazi social policy was the idea of the Volksgemeinschaft. This concept served as both an ideological vision and a propaganda tool, referring to a racially unified, hierarchically ordered national community. The regime sought to overcome class divisions, economic conflict, and political pluralism by fusing all “Aryan” Germans into a cohesive body defined by blood, loyalty, and sacrifice.
Yet this unity was always predicated on exclusion. Jews, Roma and Sinti people, disabled individuals, political opponents, homosexuals, and others were defined as Gemeinschaftsfremde—those alien to the community. Their removal, sterilisation, or destruction was essential to achieving the Nazi utopia.
The Volksgemeinschaft served as justification for sweeping social reforms: education was restructured to produce loyal citizens, gender roles were strictly regulated, and work and leisure were transformed into tools of indoctrination. As Richard Evans notes, the Volksgemeinschaft was a myth that helped “mobilise support, suppress dissent, and legitimate persecution.”
Youth and Education: Indoctrination from the Ground Up
The Nazi regime placed enormous emphasis on shaping the next generation of Germans. Education was refashioned as a vehicle for ideological indoctrination. School curricula prioritised race theory, eugenics, nationalism, and militarism. Jewish teachers were purged, and textbooks were rewritten to glorify the German past and demonise Germany’s enemies.
The Ministry of Education, under Bernhard Rust, ensured uniformity across the Reich. Subjects like biology were used to teach racial hierarchy; history focused on Germany’s “betrayal” after World War I; and physical education was expanded to toughen boys for military service.
Outside the classroom, Nazi youth organisations took over the socialisation of children. The Hitler Youth (for boys) and the League of German Girls (BDM) became compulsory by 1936. Through marches, summer camps, and drills, they instilled obedience, anti-Semitism, and loyalty to Hitler.
As historian Lisa Pine argues, the goal was to create “a new German man and woman”—selfless, fanatical, and devoted to the Reich.² By controlling the formative experiences of children, the regime sought to ensure that Nazism would endure beyond the lives of its founders.
Women and the Family: The Politics of Reproduction
The Nazi ideal of womanhood centred on the three Ks—Kinder, Küche, Kirche (children, kitchen, church). Women were expected to be wives and mothers, bearers of the next generation of Aryans. The regime implemented policies to increase the birthrate of racially “pure” Germans and reduce female participation in the workforce.
Marriage loans were introduced in 1933, giving couples state support that was partially forgiven with the birth of each child. The Mother’s Cross was awarded to women with four or more children, and contraception and abortion were banned for Aryan women. Conversely, “unfit” women—those with disabilities or hereditary illnesses—were forcibly sterilised under the 1933 Law for the Prevention of Hereditarily Diseased Offspring.
The Nazi vision of family extended to youth policy: mothers were to raise boys into soldiers and girls into future mothers. Educational opportunities for women were curtailed in favour of domestic science. However, by the late 1930s, as rearmament and labour shortages intensified, some of these restrictions were relaxed.
Despite the rhetoric of traditionalism, Nazi gender policy was inconsistent and opportunistic. Women remained vital to both population growth and the wartime economy, illustrating the tension between ideology and pragmatic governance.³
Labour and Leisure: The DAF, KdF, and the Politics of the Everyday
With the abolition of trade unions in May 1933, all German workers were forced into the Deutsche Arbeitsfront (German Labour Front, DAF), led by Robert Ley. The DAF was not a union but a state-controlled organisation that sought to eliminate class conflict and integrate workers into the Volksgemeinschaft.
The DAF oversaw wage policy, labour discipline, and workplace culture. It ran propaganda campaigns celebrating labour as a patriotic duty, and implemented training programs through Beauty of Labour (Schönheit der Arbeit) to improve working conditions and instil loyalty.
The most famous social programme of the DAF was Strength Through Joy (Kraft durch Freude, KdF), which provided subsidised holidays, cultural events, and leisure activities for workers. Cruises, theatre trips, and even car ownership (the ill-fated “people’s car,” or Volkswagen) were promoted to reward compliant behaviour and depoliticise the working class.
As historian Ian Kershaw notes, these initiatives created a sense of inclusion and upward mobility—“the dictatorship delivered more than terror; it delivered benefits.”⁴ But this social integration always came at the cost of freedom and dissent.
Persecution and Exclusion: Eugenics, Anti-Semitism, and Racial Hygiene
While promoting inclusion for the “racially valuable,” the Nazi state implemented increasingly radical measures to isolate and destroy the “unfit.” This began with legislation, such as the Law for the Prevention of Hereditarily Diseased Offspring (1933), which led to the forced sterilisation of over 400,000 people.
The regime’s escalating anti-Semitism was central to its social policy. The Nuremberg LawsNuremberg Laws Full Description: A set of anti-Semitic and racist laws that institutionalized the racial theories of the Nazi ideology. They provided the legal framework for the systematic persecution of Jews, stripping them of citizenship and prohibiting marriage between Jews and non-Jews.The Nuremberg Laws marked the transition from social prejudice to legal apartheid. By defining who was a “Jew” based on ancestry rather than belief, the state created a racial caste system. These laws legitimized discrimination, removing the protection of the law from a specific segment of the population. Critical Perspective:These laws demonstrate how the legal system—often viewed as a protector of justice—can be weaponized to commit crimes against humanity. By rendering Jews “socially dead” and stripping them of their rights as citizens, the state prepared the ground for their physical destruction. It proves that legality is not the same as morality; the Holocaust was, technically, “legal” under the laws of the time. (1935) institutionalised racial hierarchy, stripping Jews of citizenship and banning marriage or sexual relations between Jews and non-Jews. These laws created a legal basis for social ostracism, violence, and eventually deportation.
Other groups targeted included Roma, Afro-Germans, homosexuals, the disabled, and Jehovah’s Witnesses. Many were subject to forced sterilisation, imprisonment, or police surveillance. The mentally ill were interned in asylums and, by 1939, subjected to the secretive T4 euthanasia programme, which prefigured the Holocaust.
The Nazis portrayed these actions as necessary for the biological health of the nation. Public health campaigns, exhibitions like “The Eternal Jew,” and pseudo-scientific eugenics reinforced the idea that the Volksgemeinschaft must be cleansed of “degenerates.”
Propaganda and Consent: Manufacturing Loyalty
Propaganda was not merely an accessory to Nazi power—it was one of its primary tools. Joseph Goebbels’ Ministry of Public Enlightenment and Propaganda controlled every aspect of public communication: newspapers, radio, film, literature, and art.
Through tightly coordinated messaging, the regime created a reality in which the Führer was infallible, Jews were dangerous parasites, and National Socialism was the only legitimate worldview. Massive rallies like the Nuremberg Party Days and visually stunning films like Leni Riefenstahl’s Triumph of the Will glorified unity and militarism.
Propaganda also served to integrate ordinary citizens into the regime. Posters celebrating the Hitler Youth, radio broadcasts of Hitler’s speeches, and weekly film reels in cinemas made Nazi ideology inescapable. Even children’s books promoted racial purity and Aryan supremacy.
Consent was not universal, but many Germans supported—or at least accepted—the regime’s social policies, especially those that seemed to deliver stability, employment, or status. The blurring of propaganda, welfare, and repression created what Detlev Peukert called a “totalitarian welfare state.”⁵
Historiographical Debates: Coercion, Consent, and Social Revolution
Historians continue to debate the nature of Nazi social policy. Was it imposed from above by a tyrannical regime, or did it reflect the desires and values of many Germans?
The intentionalist school (e.g. Lucy Dawidowicz) views Nazi policies as the outcome of Hitler’s ideological blueprint, enacted with ruthless determination. The functionalist school (e.g. Hans Mommsen) emphasises the chaotic, improvised nature of Nazi governance, suggesting that radicalisation emerged from internal competition within the regime.
Ian Kershaw offers a middle ground in his theory of “working towards the Führer”—where subordinate officials anticipated Hitler’s desires, producing escalating extremism from below.⁶
On the question of popular support, historians like Götz Aly and Robert Gellately have highlighted the material benefits of Nazi rule for many Germans. Aly argues that social welfare for “racial comrades” was financed by plunder from Jews and occupied territories, tying ordinary people to the regime.⁷
Others, such as Claudia Koonz, emphasise the role of women and the middle classes in sustaining Nazi ideals, not as passive victims but active agents of conformity.
These debates remind students that Nazi Germany was not simply a regime of repression; it was a society deeply transformed by ideology, in ways both imposed and embraced.
Conclusion
Between 1933 and 1939, the Nazi regime reshaped German society through an aggressive programme of social engineering. Its policies were not merely authoritarian tools but expressions of a radical ideological vision that sought to reorder every domain of life around racial purity, loyalty to the Führer, and national strength.
Whether through youth indoctrination, gendered reproductive policy, state-controlled labour, or the marginalisation and destruction of minorities, these policies aimed to create a total society—a Volksgemeinschaft—united by myth, discipline, and exclusion.
To understand the social history of the Third Reich is to grasp how ordinary life can be politicised, how propaganda and policy work in tandem, and how ideology can penetrate even the most intimate corners of personal life. For students and scholars alike, it remains a sobering case study in the social foundations of totalitarian rule.
Selected Bibliography
Richard J. Evans, The Third Reich in Power (London: Penguin, 2005). Lisa Pine, Education in Nazi Germany (Oxford: Berg, 2010). Claudia Koonz, Mothers in the Fatherland (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1987). Ian Kershaw, The Nazi Dictatorship: Problems and Perspectives of Interpretation, 4th ed. (London: Bloomsbury, 2000). Detlev Peukert, Inside Nazi Germany: Conformity, Opposition, and Racism in Everyday Life (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1987). Hans Mommsen, From Weimar to Auschwitz (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1991). Götz Aly, Hitler’s Beneficiaries: Plunder, Racial War, and the Nazi Welfare State (New York: Metropolitan Books, 2007).
Leave a Reply to billhaagrealestateCancel reply