The historical case study of German associations during World War I highlights the limits of sociability in times of political polarization. At the war’s beginning, German elites supported political associations that welcomed the entire political spectrum, thus radically breaking with associations that had developed along political, social, and religious dividing lines. The article shows how the inclusive sociability that the common cause of the war initially spurred failed to withstand the pressures of mass politics, extreme sociopolitical fragmentation, and the new republican institutions. The discrediting of associations as sources of inclusive sociability paved the path to conscious efforts to educate German citizens and political professionals to the working of democratic systems. The analysis suggests a conceptualization of civil society that relies on explicit strategies, such as political education, to cultivate the political conduct that modern democracies require, replacing the faith in associations as indirect sources of democratic governance.
AdamT. (2016). Philanthropy, civil society, and the state in German history, 1815-1989. Camden.
2.
AdamT.LässigS.LingelbachG. (Eds.). (2009). Stifter, Spender und Mäzene. USA und Deutschland im historischen Vergleich. Steiner.
3.
AllenW. (1984). The Nazi seizure of power (Rev. ed.). Franklin Watts.
4.
AlthammerB. (2017). Review of philanthropy, civil society, and the state in German history, 1815–1989, by T. Adam. Central European History, 50(3), 416–418.
5.
AndersonM. (2000). Practicing democracy. Princeton University Press.
6.
BermanS. (1997). Civil society and the collapse of the Weimar Republic. World Politics, 49(3), 401–429.
7.
BetzH.-G. (1999). The evolution and transformation of the German party system. In AllenC. (Ed.), Transformation of the German political party system (pp. 30–61). Berghahn.
8.
BlackbournD.EleyG. (1984). The peculiarities of German history. Oxford University Press.
9.
BruckM.GleichenH.BoehmM. (Eds.). (1922). Die Neue Front. Paetel.
10.
ChickeringR. (1984). We men who feel most German. Allen/Unwin.
11.
ChickeringR. (1988). War, peace, and social mobilization in imperial Germany. In ChatfieldC.DungenP. (Eds.), Peace movements and political cultures (pp. 3–22). University of Tennessee Press.
12.
ChickeringR. (2004). Imperial Germany and the Great War, 1914-1918 (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
13.
ClemensE. (2007). Toward a historicized sociology: Theorizing events, processes, and emergence. Annual Review of Sociology, 33, 527–549.
14.
DahrendorfR. (1979/1965). Society and democracy in Germany. Norton.
15.
Der Verein, der uns noch gefehlt hatte. (11/30/1915). Leipziger Volkszeitung. GStA PK, I. HA, Rep. 77 CB S, Nr. 328.
16.
DG. (1915, December2). Protokoll. Landesarchiv Berlin, B Rep. 042, Nr. 26332.
17.
DG. (1918, February18). Protokoll. Landesarchiv Berlin, B Rep. 042, Nr. 26332.
18.
DG. (n.d.). Bylaws. Landesarchiv Berlin, B Rep. 042, Nr. 26332.
19.
DijckM.MunckB.TerpstraN. (2017). Relocating civil society. Social Science History, 41(1), 1–17.
20.
EleyG. (1991). Reshaping the German right. University of Michigan Press.
21.
EleyG. (1996). German history and the contradictions of modernity. In EleyG. (Ed.), Society, culture, and the state in Germany, 1870-1930 (pp. 67–103). The University of Michigan Press.
22.
EvansE. (Ed.). (1978). Society and politics in Wilhelmine Germany. Croom Helm.
23.
FVA. (1915, March). Kundgebung. Landesarchiv Berlin, A Rep. 226, Nr. 1479.
JäckhE. (1923). Das Dritte Jahr. (Staat und Wirtschaft—Wissen und Wille.). Berichte der Deutschen Hochschule für Politik, 1(1), 1–14.
34.
JäckhE. (Ed.). (1931). Politik als Wissenschaft. Zehn Jahre Deutsche Hochschule für Politik. Verlag-Hermann-Reckendorf.
35.
JäckhE. (1954). Der goldene Pflug. Deutsche-Verlags-Anstalt.
36.
JefferiesM. (2008). Contesting the German empire, 1871-1919. Blackwell’s.
37.
JonesL. (1988). German liberalism and the dissolution of the Weimar party system, 1918-1933. The University of North Carolina Press.
38.
KaplanD. (2018). Social club sociability as a model for national solidarity. American Journal of Cultural Sociology, 6, 1–36.
39.
KappW.to Deutsche Gesellschaft 1914. (1918, October14). GStA PK, VI. HA Nl Kapp, W., Nr. 398.
40.
KockaJ.FreyM. (Eds.). (1998). Bürgerkultur und Mäzenatentum im 19. Jahrhundert. Bostelmann/Siebenhaar.
41.
KorenblatS. (2006). A school for the republic?Central European History, 39, 394–430.
42.
KosharR. (1986). Social life, local politics, and Nazism. Marburg, 1880-1935. The University of North Carolina.
43.
KühneT. (2008). Political culture and democratization. In RetallackJ. (Ed.), Imperial Germany 1871-1918 (pp. 174–195). Oxford University Press.
44.
LambertiM. (2004). The politics of education. Teachers and school reform in Weimar Germany. Berghahn.
45.
LepsiusM. (1973). Parteiensystem und Sozialstruktur. In RitterG. (Ed.), Deutsche Parteien vor 1918 (pp. 56–80). Kiepenheuer/Witsch.
46.
Lobenstein-ReichmannA. (2014). Der völkische Demokratiebegriff. In KämperH.HaslingerP.RaithelT. (Eds.), Demokratiegeschichte als Zäsurgeschichte—Diskurse der frühen Weimarer Republik (pp. 285–306). De Gruyter.
47.
MalkopoulouA.NormanL. (2018). Three models of democratic self-defense: Militant democracy and its alternatives. Political Studies, 66(2), 442–458.
48.
McCarthyK. (2003). American creed: Philanthropy and the rise of civil society, 1700-1865. University of Chicago Press.
49.
MeineckeF. (1917). Vaterlandspartei und deutsche Politik. Die Hilfe, 47, 702.
50.
MeineckeF. (1918). Rede. In Volksbund für Freiheit und Vaterland (Ed.), Um Freiheit und Vaterland (pp. 25–34). Perthes.
MisheA. (2014). Measuring futures in action: Projective grammars in the Rio+20 debates. Theory and Society, 43, 437–464.
53.
MommsenH. (1996). The rise and fall of Weimar democracy. University of North Carolina Press.
54.
NaumannF. (1900). Demokratie und Kaisertum (2nd ed.). Hilfe.
55.
NaumannF.HeileW. (1918). Erziehung zur Politik. Hilfe.
56.
PlehnH. (1914). Eine Hochschule für Politik. Der Greif, 1(10), 265–272.
57.
Drews, B. (1921). Politische Bildung: Wille, Wesen, Ziel, Weg. Deutsche Verlagsgesellschaft für Politik und Geschichte.
58.
PutnamR. (1993). Making democracy work. Princeton University Press.
59.
ReiterB. (2009). Civil society and democracy: Weimar reconsidered. Journal of Civil Society, 5(1), 21–34.
60.
RobbinsK. (2006). The nonprofit sector in historical perspective. In PowellW.SteinbergR. (Eds.), The nonprofit sector. A research handbook (2nd ed., pp. 13–31). Yale University Press.
61.
RoheK. (1992). Wähler und Wählertradition in Deutschland. Suhrkamp.
62.
RosenblumN. (1998). Membership and morals. Princeton University Press.
63.
RühlmannP. (1920). Das Problem: Politische Führer, eine Bildungsfrage. Preussische Jahrbücher, 181(2), 233–241.
64.
RühlmannP. (1928). Delbrücks “Mittwochabend.” In DanielsE.RühlmannP. (Eds.), Am Webstuhl der Zeit (pp. 75–81). Hobbing.
65.
SchellenbergJ. (1983). Deutsche Gesellschaft 1914 (DG). In FrickeD., et al. (Eds.), Lexikon zur Parteiengeschichte (Vol. 1, pp. 700–703). Bibliographisches-Institut.
66.
SchifferE. (1951). Ein Leben für den Liberalismus. Herbig.
67.
SchmittC. (1988/1923). The crisis of parliamentary democracy. MIT Press.
68.
SeligmanA. (1992). The idea of civil society. Princeton University Press.
69.
ShilsE. (1997). The virtue of civility (GrosbyS. E. Ed.). Liberty Fund.
70.
SimmelG. (1949). The sociology of sociability. American Journal of Sociology, 55(3), 254–261.
71.
SimonsH. (1926). Politische Schulung und Hochschule. Deutsche Hochschule für Politik.
72.
SolfW. (1915). Rede zur Gründung der Gesellschaft 1914. Fischer.
73.
SösemannB. (1987). Politische Kommunikation im “Reichsbelagerungszustand.” In BobrowskyM.LangenbucherW. (Eds.), Wege zur Kommunikationsgeschichte (pp. 630–649). Ölschläger.
74.
SösemannB. (1997). Jenseits von Partei und Parlament. In WilderotterH. (Ed.), Walther Rathenau, 1867-1922 (pp. 169–178). Argon.
75.
SperberJ. (1997a). Bürgertum, Bürgerlichkeit, Bürgerliche Gesellschaft. The Journal of Modern History, 69(2), 271–297.
76.
SperberJ. (1997b). The Kaiser’s voters. Cambridge University Press.
77.
StegmannD. (2007). Krieg und politische Kultur. In FaulstichW. (Ed.), Das Zweite Jahrzehnt (pp. 21–39). Fink.
78.
SteinL. (1930). Aus dem Leben eines Optimisten. Brückenverlag.
79.
SuvalS. (1985). Electoral politics in Wilhelmine Germany. University of North Carolina Press.
80.
TaylorC. (1990). Modes of civil society. Public Culture, 3(1), 95–118.
TrentmannF. (2003). Introduction. In TrentmannF. (Ed.), Paradoxes of civil society (Rev. ed., pp. 1–46). Berghahn.
83.
VerheyJ. (2000). The spirit of 1914. Cambridge University Press.
84.
Volksbund. (1918, January25). Niederschrift aus der Vorstandssitzung. BArch, R 8057/2.
85.
Volksbund. (1917, November). Aufruf. GStA PK, VI. HA Nl Kapp, W., Nr. 412.
86.
Volksbund. (1918, November29). Um Freiheit und Vaterland. Perthes.
87.
WagnerP. (Ed.). (2006). The languages of civil society. Berghahn.
88.
Was will die “Deutsche Gesellschaft 1914”? (1915, September8). Vorwärts. GStA PK, I. HA, Rep. 77 CB S, Nr. 328.
89.
WeberP. (2016). Transnational asymmetries: US philanthropic foundations and the German school of politics in the 1920s and 1930s. In WitkowskiG.BauerkämperA. (Eds.), German philanthropy in transatlantic perspective (pp. 75–93). Springer.
90.
WeberP. (2019). Ernst Jäckh and the National Internationalism of Interwar Germany. Central European History, 52(3), 402–423.
91.
WehlerH. (1985/1973). The German empire, 1871-1918. Berg.
92.
WitkowskiG. (2015). Donors in a dictatorship: Giving, civil society, and democratic action in communist East Germany. Voluntas, 26(6), 2447–2461.
