Rushton report, Frey Gerhard



in the Federal Republic
Of Germany

A study and analysis of the rise
of right-wing politics and attitudes
in the FRG over two decades.


Reginald M. Rushton

June 1995




section subject

1.0 Introduction and notes
1.1 Copyright notice
1.2 Introduction
2.0 Chronology
3.0 The popularity of right-wing extremism
4.0 The Parties
4.1 Die Republikaner
4.2 Die Deutsche Volksunion
4.3 Die Nationaldemokratische Partei Deutschlands
5.0 Militant Groups
5.1 The Skinheads
5.2 Neo-Nazi groups
6.0 Historical Revisionism
7.0 Extremism in a European Context
8.0 Combatting the Extremists
9.0 Public Reaction
10.0 Conclusion



1.0 Introduction and notes
1.1 Copyright

This work is the copyright of R. M. Rushton, 1995. Free
distribution via electronic media is permitted, provided that
neither this copyright notice nor the document as a whole is
altered in any way. Permission to distribute this document in
printed form must be obtained in writing.

1.2 Introduction

The original version of this paper was written as a final
year undergraduate dissertation in the Department of German
Studies at the University of Birmingham (UK). It is my
intention to try to keep this work updated, although I cannot
guarantee that updates will be regularly published.

The format of the first half of this paper is principally
chronological, detailing important events, such as the
founding of individual extremist parties and subsequent
government legislation aimed at curbing their activities. The
second half of the paper concentrates on the present-day scene
in Germany, with particular reference to the reasons behind
the popularity of the right-wing extremists and certain
parties, the radical right-wingers and skinheads and the
reaction of the Government and the public.


In 1973, the founder of the neo-Nazi group Bauern- und
Buergerinitiative, Thies Christophersen, published a text
entitled Die Auschwitz-Luege (The Auschwitz Lie), one of many
such revisionist articles to appear in the 1970s and 1980s,
culminating in the infamous Leuchter Report. Also in this
year, Joachim Floth founded his Deutsch-Voelkische Gemeinschaft
1974 saw the arrival of three new right-wing
organisations: the Wehrsportgruppe Hoffmann (WSG), the
Deutsche Sozialistische Volkspartei and the Unabhaengiger
Schuelerverbund. In September of the same year, the Rechtsblock
fuer Arbeiter, Bauern und Soldaten was also formed, whilst in
November, Gary Rex Lauck, an American revisionist, was
arrested and expelled for extolling the virtues of National
In March 1975, the Bund Freies Deutschland won 3.4% of
the votes in the elections for the Berliner Abgeordnetenhaus.
In April of the same year, the Kampfbund Deutscher Soldaten
(KDS) was formed in Frankfurt am Main. Its main policy was one
of Holocaust denial, possibly sparked off by Christophersen’s
Die Auschwitz-Luege and similar publications.
In October, the Nationaldemokratische Partei Deutschlands(NPD)
was deemed to be an extremist party and to have
unconstitutional aims. Proof that banning one party did not
prevent the extremists is demonstrated by the fact that in
December, Manfred Ohl a former NPD official founded the
Nationalrevolutionaerer Bund (NRB).
In March 1976 Gary Rex Lauck entered Germany with a false
passport and was subsequently arrested in Mainz, before being
given a four year jail sentence and fine in July, for
spreading Nazi propaganda. He was later expelled from Germany,
although he was allowed to return in 1979 to testify at the
trial of a neo-Nazi.
May 1977 saw Michael Kuehnen, a former lieutenant in the
German army, form the SA-Sturm-Hamburg. This marked the start
of Kuehnen’s career as a neo-Nazi leader. In November he was to
found the Aktionsfront Nationaler Sozialisten. In September
the Bund Deutscher Maedel (BDM) was formed in Hamburg to follow
the ideals laid down by its Nazi namesake. It was in this year
that the former Chancellor Willy Brandt called for a crackdown
on neo-Nazi activities. Consequently all states were required
to submit a report on extremist activity in their regions.
In March 1978, the leader of the Wehrsportgruppe Hoffmann
was sentenced to imprisonment and fined for assembling an arms
In 1978 and 1979 the Government banned, or prevented the
distribution to minors, of over 50 neo-Nazi publications.
On March 17th 1979, the Freiheitliche Deutsche
Arbeiterpartei (FAP) was founded by Martin Pappe, an
unemployed salesman and teacher. During the summer of this
year, the Hilfsorganisation fuer nationale politische Gefangene
und deren Angehoerige e.V. (HNG) was founded. This was an
umbrella group which aimed to provide mainly financial support
for neo-Nazis. Considering the benefactors of the work of this
organisation, it is quite surprising that it managed to
achieve the status of a registered charity.
In September, Michael Kuehnen was arrested for inciting
racist attacks and was given a four year sentence, during
which he wrote Die Zweite Revolution. Glaube und Kampf (The
Second revolution. Belief and Battle), extolling the virtues
of a Fourth Reich. His sentence was extended by eight months
in April 1992, for sending a copy of this book to Thies
Christophersen for publishing.<1> In early December Gerhard
Frey founded the Volksbewegung fuer Generalamnestie (VOGA).
In 1979 and 1980 a Hollywood television series, entitled
Holocaust, was screened throughout Western Europe, including
Germany. A survey conducted by a West German television
company found that 41% of Germans with televisions saw the
final episode of the series, and whilst 75% of these were born
after Hitler’s rise to power in 1933, and so would have been
12 years old at the end of the war, possibly too young to
remember the events in any great detail. The survey also found
that 81% of those who watched the final episode discussed it
with others and that 65% admitted to being “deeply moved” by
it.<2> The series was attacked by the NPD’s newspaper, the
Deutsche Stimme, and the Deutsche National-Zeitung, the
newspaper of the DVU, as being Hollywood propaganda, and led
to an increase in neo-Nazi activity throughout Germany.
In January 1980 Gerhart Baum, the Interior Minister,
banned the Wehrsportgruppe Hoffmann for being
anti-constitutional because of its appeal to the young,
although in March, Karl-Heinz Hoffmann took his objections to
the Administrative Courtin Berlin, which dismissed the
complaint on December 2nd. On September 28th at the
Oktoberfest in Munich, a 24lb bomb placed near the entrance,
killed 12 people, including the bomber, and injured 312. A
neo-Nazi group, initially suspected to be the Wehrsportgruppe
Hoffmann, claimed responsibility, although it was later
discovered that the bomber had left the paramilitary group
prior to the attack.
On the 24th March 1981, a series of raids on numerous
apartments across the Federal Republic, led to the
confiscation of a large amount of Canadian and American
anti-Semitic material. Wilkinson states that nearly 1,000
homes were raided, although Angelika Koenigseder quotes a
figure of about 450.<3> Gary Lauck and Ernst Zuendel, a German
Revisionist living in Canada, were subsequently arrested and
charged with the smuggling and distribution of banned neo-Nazi
propaganda. In April tough new laws were introduced, banning
the distribution of anti-Semitic propaganda, including
Hitler’s autobiography Mein Kampf.
On October 24th, 156kg of explosives, 13,520 rounds of
ammunition and 1kg of the highly toxic potassium cyanide were
found on Lueneburg Heath. In November, Franz Schoenhuber
published his book, Ich war dabei (I Was There), celebrating
his days in the Waffen-SS. This led to him leaving the CSU,
although the right-wing Deutsche National-Zeitung pronounced
it to be the “book of the year”.
In its 1981 report, the Office for the Protection of the
Constitution declared that crime caused by the right
extremists was at its highest level since the end of the
Second World War, having recorded 1,824 incidents, an increase
of 11% on the previous year. Wilkinson states that:

“Two thirds of these were directly linked to the neo-Nazi
groups, and over 300 were anti-Semitic.”<4>

In January 1982, the Interior Minister, Gerhart Baum,
banned the Volkssozialistische Bewegung Deutschlands/Partei
der Arbeit (VSBD/PdA), led by Friedhelm Busse, and the Junge
Front (JF). In February the Freundeskreis Ulrich Hutten was
founded, whilst in March, Friedrich Ring founded the Deutscher
Buergerschutz (DBS) in response to growing crime and an
increase in the influx of foreigners. In April the Hamburger
Liste fuer Auslaenderstopp was formed.
January 1983 saw the merger of the Aktionsfront
Nationaler Sozialisten with the Nationale Aktivisten (NA),
forming the ANS/NA. On April 1st the Deutsche
Freiheitsbewegung (DDF) was formed. In November, former
CSU-Bundestagsabgeordnete Franz Handlos and Ekkehard Voigt
formed die Republikaner with Franz Schoenhuber. On December
7th, the Interior Minister banned the Aktionsfront Nationaler
Sozialisten/Nationale Aktivisten and affiliated organisations.
Also in this year, Friedhelm Busse was sentenced to three
years and nine months imprisonment for numerous offences
involving the possession of firearms.
On 28th April 1984, the Nationaldemokratische Partei
Deutschlands (NPD) in North Rhein-Westphalia first used
skinheads for security at its regional party conference.
Vehicles were damaged and political opponents injured. In
April, Michael Kuehnen founded the ANS-Auslandsorganisation
(ANS-AO), as a precursor to a pan-European extremist movement.
On May 26th the Komitee zur Vorbereitung der Feierlichkeiten
des 100. Geburtstages von Adolf Hitler (KAH) (Committee for
the Preparations for the Celebrations of the 100th Birthday of
Adolf Hitler) was formed. At its conference in November, the
NPD rejected a motion calling for the party to distance itself
from the skinhead movement.
In January 1985, the FAP and the Wiking-Jugend formed an
umbrella organisation for nationalist groups: the Volkstreue
ausserparlamentarische Opposition (VAPO). In March, Voigt and
Handlos left the Republikaner and set up the Bayerische
Republikaner and the Freiheitliche Volkspartei (FVP)
respectively. Also in March, the Soziale Volkspartei was
formed in Berlin. At the Erste Europaeische Fuehrerthing in
Paris on September 1st, many right-wing organisations decide
to coordinate their activities on a European level. In
November, two further organisations were formed: the
Nationalistische Front (NF) and the Deutsche
Aktionspartei/Bewegung der totalen Ordnung (DAP).
In September 1986, the Gemeinschaft Eisernes Kreuz EK1
was formed by former members of the FAP, whilst on October
12th, the Republikaner won 3% of the vote in the Bavarian
regional elections. In November, Gerhard Frey of the Deutsche
Volksunion (DVU), founded the Deutsche Volksliste.
On March 11th 1987, the former NPD official Guenter
Deckert founded Die Deutschen, whilst on April 17th the
Koenigstreue Deutsche Volkspartei (KDVP) was formed.
In late August, neo-Nazis demonstrated in Wunsiedel, awaiting
the funeral of Rudolf Hess. In September, two more extremist
organisations were formed: namely the Arbeitskreis Junge
Familie and the Sturmvogel – Deutscher Jugendbund.
In January 1988, the Deutsch-Nationale Volkspartei (DNVP)
was formed. On 5th April, Fred A. Leuchter published the
Leuchter Report in the USA. As an engineer and self-pronounced
gas chamber expert, he claimed that the mass killings of the
Jews in the so-called “extermination camps” could not have
taken place. This served to strengthen the beliefs of
right-wing extremists, neo-Nazis and Revisionists, that there
was no mass-extermination of the Jews under the Third Reich.
The Auto- und Buergerpartei (ABD) was founded in September,
followed by Die Demokraten in November.
On January 2nd 1989, during the campaign for the
elections for the Berlin House of Representatives, the
Republikaner showed a television advertisement of Turkish
children and, in the background, music from the film Spiel mir
das Lied vom Tod (Play Me The Song of Death). In the elections
later that month, the Republikaner won 7.5% of the votes.
However, in June, they won 7.1% of the votes (i.e. two million
votes) in the European elections, with a result of 14.6% in
Bavaria. In May of that year, the Munich court ordered the
withdrawal of a computer diskette containing a program
entitled Arier-Test (Aryan Test).
In July 1990, former FAP activists formed the Nationale
Offensive (NO).
After the banning of the Internationaler
Revisionistenkongress / Leuchter-Kongress in Munich in March
1991 and the arrest of its organiser Ernst Zuendel, 400
delegates protested in the city. On 25th April Michael Kuehnen,
“outed” as a homosexual during his three year incarceration
between 1985 and 1988, died from an AIDS-related illness.
From 17th to 22nd September radical right-wing skinheads
rioted outside a residence for foreigners in Hoyerswerda
(Saxony) injuring 30 people. This protest triggered numerous
other attacks throughout the country in the following weeks,
injuring over 100 people. Indeed, during the weekend of the
28th-29th September, police recorded 43 attacks on foreigners,
22 of which were in North Rhein-Westphalia. On the 3rd
October, two Lebanese children were critically injured in a
fire-bomb attack on a refuge in Huenxe in North
Rhein-Westphalia. On the 13th October, a refuge in Immenstadt
(Allgaeu) was destroyed by a fire-bomb, seriously injuring two
On March 14th 1992, a Skinhead concert was held near
Weimar, with German groups such as Radikahl and Kraftschlag
playing alongside American groups such as Bound for Glory. On
April 5th the Republikaner won 10.9% of the votes in the
regional elections in Badem-Wuerttemberg, whilst in a Berlin
district election in May the party won 8.3% of the votes cast.
In July, the Foerderwerk Mitteldeutsche Jugend (FMJ) was
founded. From August 22nd to 28th there was heavy rioting
outside a home for asylum seekers in Rostock-Lichtenhagen,
culminating in an arson attack on the home on the 25th.
Between August 29th and September 2nd, there was major rioting
outside an asylum seekers refuge in Cottbus. On November 23rd
one Turkish woman and two Turkish children were killed and
nine others injured when neo-Nazis set fire to their refuge in
Moelln (Schleswig-Holstein). Four days later the
Nationalsozialistische Front (NF) was banned, as was the
Deutsche Alternative on December 10th, the Deutscher
Kameradschaftsbund (DKB) on the 21st and the Nationale
Offensive on the 22nd. The events at Rostock and Cottbus
marked the start of a new wave of violence throughout Germany:
from September to December 4167 racially motivated incidents
were recorded, both the violent and the non-violent, compared
with 2169 incidents in the period from January to August.<5>
On May 29th 1993, an arson attack on a house in Solingen
killed five Turkish women and a girl, sparking off a new surge
of extremist violence against foreigners throughout Germany.
On August 27th Brandenburg became the first state to ban the
use of the Reichskriegsflagge, a symbol used by the neo-Nazis
to stir up hatred against foreigners. This move was followed
only days later by a similar ban in other states. Joerg
Petritsch, a singer with the skinhead group Stoerkraft, was
given a two-year suspended sentence for spreading
Nazi-propaganda. On October 29th, Cologne police arrested Fred
A. Leuchter and charged him with Holocaust denial.
On April 14th 1994, when Manfred Kanther, the Interior
Minister, published the 1993 Report of the Office for the
Protection of the Constitution, he stated that he had no
intention of banning either the Republikaner or the Deutsche
Volksunion (DVU), for fear of driving their 23,000 members
underground. Instead, he said, the parties would continue to
be carefully monitored by the police. On May 14th, neo-Nazis
terrorised foreigners in Magdeburg by shouting “Deutschland
den Deutschen” (“Germany for the Germans”) and chasing African
students into a cafi before beating them with iron bars.
On the 17th January 1995, the trial of three men and one
woman began in Gross-Gerau. The four are charged with
publishing the neo-Nazi booklet Der Einblick in 1993,
containing the names and addresses of about 200 political
opponents. Despite being withdrawn, some 180 copies are
estimated to remain in circulation. The Dignity Report from
February 15th 1994 said the following of the publication:

“On the pages of Der Einblick, the top leadership in German
neo-Nazi networks issues a call to “neutralize all
anti-German, anti-nationalist forces” and urge followers to
“stop squandering the enormous violent potential” of the
racist movement and to “mount successful counter actions.” The
publication contains information on intelligence gathering
techniques and urges neo-Nazis to cultivate relations with
police so that “data can be gathered without danger to

On the 18th January, the Office for the Protection
reported that the 1994 figures for right-wing offences in
Berlin had risen from 650 in 1993 to 750. On 24th February,
the Government eventually banned the FAP, described by Manfred
Kanther, Interior Minister, as:

“an anti-democratic group “which disdains human rights and
stirs up xenophobia and racism.””<6>

Similarly, in Hamburg, homes of members of the Nationale Liste
were raided.
On April 20th scores of neo-Nazis were arrested around
Germany for rioting to mark Hitler’s birthday. In the same
week Guenter Deckert, the leader of the NPD, was sentenced to
two years’ imprisonment by a court in Karlsruhe for Holocaust
denial and incitement to racial hatred.
On March 23rd, Hamburg police raided the homes of those
who had ordered and received neo-Nazi propaganda from the
NSDAP-AO. Almost simultaneously Gerhard (Gary) Lauck was
arrested by Danish police in Copenhagen. After much legal
wrangling, the Danish Supreme Court confirmed on Friday 21st
June that Lauck should be extradited to Germany to face
prosecution under German anti-Nazi law.

3.0 The popularity of right-wing extremism

The main cause for the rising popularity of the
right-wing extremist parties in the mid to late 1980s could,
as Betz suggests, be almost completely due to the Parteien-
und Politikverdrossenheit (party and political apathy), which
swept the country. This can be seen in the fact that at the
first elections after reunification, those in 1990, ten
million of those registered to vote stayed at home. In March
1989, 81% of all Germans and 90% of Republikaner voters
questioned in an EMNID poll believed that the politicians from
the mainstream parties were “out-of-touch” with the average
person. Similarly, 65% of all voters and 88% of Republikaner
voters considered the mainstream political parties to be no
longer capable of solving Germany’s problems. In the same
poll, it was discovered that 43% of Republikaner voters had
confidence in the party with regard to housing; 40% with
regard to unemployment; 18% over the general state of the
economy and 80% over immigration. In 1993 48% of Germans were
“very worried” that politicians were no longer capable of
solving the urgent problems facing Germany, such as
immigration and the economy.<7>
Similarly, in the states of the former East Germany
citizens were, after unification, faced with increasing rents
coupled with increasing unemployment. This, in turn, led to an
increase in crime, which was subsequently blamed on the
foreign population, instead of the new policy-makers: the west
German government in Bonn.
If the politicians cannot solve these problems, then who
can? For as Betz states:

“On this view radical right-wing voters are typical floating
voters who don’t understand “the intricacies of politics in
postindustrial societies” and therefore fall prey to clever
demagogues who dress up empty slogans as viable solutions to
real problems.”<8>

Therefore it can be concluded that a fair proportion of these
“floating voters” will be first-time voters. Indeed, the
majority of right-wing voters are around 20 years old.
Certainly the majority of right-wing extremists are aged
between 18 and 30 and are suspected of being responsible for
over 75% of extremist violence in 1993. Given this figure, it
is not surprising that the largest group among the extremists
(33.6%) is that of students and trainees. What is surprising,
however, is that the next highest figure is that of the
skilled workers and craftsmen, accounting for 28.7% of
extremist violence. Evidently, radical right-wing views appear
to be something inherent in the younger, educated classes.
But why should extreme right-wing views manifest
themselves as violence against foreigners? The obvious
explanation is racial purity: just as Hitler extolled the
Aryan race, modern right-wing extremists see their own racial
identity as being superior and something which they want to
preserve at all costs. Perhaps one cause of this is an
apparent unwillingness of foreigners to integrate into German
society. In 1988 the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung conducted a
survey amongst young Turks. It found that 65% of males between
20 and 30 years old socialised with Germans, whilst only 26%
of their fathers did. Similarly, Petra Kappert, writing in the
Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (25:9:1982), stated that an
estimated 50% of Turkish schoolchildren in Germany attend
Koran classes: a further example of an unwillingness to
integrate into German society and determination to preserve
their own culture when abroad.<9> Therefore, the supporters
of the radical right may regard foreigners as a threat to
their own culture and society.
A resurgence of right-wing views could, perhaps, be
considered to be an obvious reaction by citizens of a country
which lost its own culture and national identity when it lost
the Second World War. The occupation of Germany by the allied
powers after 1945 led to an influx of English-language
literature and film, the latter still being very much in
evidence in German cinemas. This loss of national identity can
also be seen as a result of the de-nazification process:
anyone listening to the anti-Semitic composer Wagner would
have been suspected of being a Nazi, as would anyone
expressing any form of national pride.

4.0 The Parties
4.1 Die Republikaner

As has already been stated, Die Republikaner was formed
on the 27th November 1983 by Franz Schoenhuber, as a party
politically located between the DVU and the NPD, principally
right of centre. However, the major problem facing the
German Government is whether Die Republikaner is really, as it
states, a coalition of democratic patriots<10>, or whether it
is just another right-wing extremist party. On the front of
their manifesto for the 1994 council elections in Mainz, the
party stated:

“We reject extremism and violence in any form!”<11>

However, the party’s rhetoric inside the manifesto smacks
heavily of right-wing propaganda:

“WE are against the municipal building of accommodation for
asylum-seekers, the use of taxes for fraudulent asylum-seekers
(about 97%) and the preferential treatment of foreigners in
the allocation of state-subsidized accommodation.”<12>


– no foreigners in the police. […]
– the immediate deportation of convicted foreign offenders,
crime among foreigners is three times higher than among German

Whilst these figures are actual statistics, it is clear that
the party is using them to its advantage, if not exploiting
them. The social policy of the manifesto was designed to
withdraw public finance from foreigners’ institutions and even
the “anti-fascist / anti-racist” groups, which the party
considers to be a cover for left-wing extremists. Such
suspicions of the Office for the Protection of the
Constitution cannot be helped by statements of the party
leadership, for example in 1993, Schoenhuber, talking about a
wartime propagandist, stated:

“… a Nazi propagandist such as Dr. Kurt Kiesinger could
become the German Chancellor.”<14>

It seems, as the British left-wing magazine The New
Statesman & Society claimed in an article entitled “The
hydra-headed monster of Germany”, that:

“So far, no member of the right-wing Republican party has been
caught red-handed at violence, and its leaders have been
careful to dissociate the part from the extremists methods, if
not their aims.”<15>

Die Republikaner does not outwardly appear to be courting the
votes of the extremists and radicals in Germany. Indeed, it
even goes so far as to exclude former members of the NPD or
DVU from its ranks, but it does seem to be exploiting the
political apathy which has swept over the country in recent
years. For as Betz states:

“Appealing to wide-spread xenophobia, growing anti-big
business and antiglobal market sentiments, and exploiting
growing uncertainty and fears with regard to the future it
conformed to the image of a populist advocate of the interests
of the small people.”<16>

Membership of the party grew from 8,500 in 1988 to 25,000
in 1989, but then declined to 15,000 in 1990. The party’s
increase in popularity after 1989 could be seen to be a
result of its relative success in the 1989 European elections,

“provided the party with almost #6 million in state election
subsidies, enabling it to expand its organisation

Since 1992, the party has been under observation by the
Office for the Protection of the Constitution and in eight
states the German intelligence services have been called in to
investigate it. On Friday March 3rd 1995, Saxony joined the
list of states which list Die Republikaner as right-wing
extremist and hence anti-constitutional. The Interior Minister
of Saxony, Heinz Eggert, said of this:

“One thing is quite clear: the declarations of the
Republikaner in its manifesto are appear entirely formal. But
the wealth of material has shown that the Republikaner
systematically defames the free democratic order, defames its
institutions, continually contravening the discrimination laws
in the areas of race, belief or nationality and shows very
little distance from National Socialism.
Now die Republikaner is classified as anti-constitutional
and that means that it will be investigated by the secret

On presenting the 1993 report of the Office for the
Protection of the Constitution on April 14th 1994, Manfred
Kanther, the Interior Minister, said that the Government had
no immediate intention of banning the party:

“… in spite of clear signs that it has links with neo-Nazi
activists. […] The reasoning is that a ban would make
martyrs of the party leaders and drive the 23,000 active
members underground.”<19>

4.2 Die Deutsche Volksunion

The Deutsche Volksunion e.V. was founded in January 1971,
by the Munich publisher
Dr. Gerhard Frey. The DVU-Liste D was formed as a new party on
March 5th 1987, and took over the entire membership of the
DVU, although the Liste D was removed in 1991. The membership
in 1993 was estimated by the report of the Office for the
Protection of the Constitution to be about 26,000, the same
figure quoted in 1992, although Dr. Frey insists that
the membership is greater.
Dr. Frey publishes two party newspapers: the Deutsche
National-Zeitung, which sells for DM1,80, and the Deutsche
Wochen-Zeitung/Deutscher Anzeiger, priced at DM2,- , which
together had a weekly circulation of 110,000 in 1989. Backes
and Jesse compare this figure to the 1986 circulation of the
Rheinische Merkur/Christ und Welt, which was 122,000 copies
per week.<20>
The DVU appears to be in a relatively strong financial
position and managed to spend over #7 million21 in the Bremen
regional elections in 1987, mainly:

“Through the sale of its nationalist media products, a book
service and the trading of Nazi memorabilia (medals, coins,

At a rally in Passau on 2nd October 1993, an auditor declared
that the last elections had cost the party DM11,000,000, paid
for by Dr. Frey.<23>

4.3 The Nationaldemokratische Partei Deutschlands

The NPD was created by members of the Deutsche
Reichspartei (DRP) on 28th November 1964, under the leadership
of Fritz Thielen and Adolf von Thadden. In 1975 the party
launched its newspaper the Deutsche Stimme. The overall aims
of the party can be best summed up by the NPD regional leader
for Lower Saxony, Horst Nolte:

“The system cannot be “improved”, it must be superseded! The
destruction of the system can only come from forces which
develop as its enemies.”<24>

The party clearly sets itself Nazi-style aims, with an
ideology similar to that of the DVU, and at the party
conference in June 1991, Guenter Deckert, a dedicated
Revisionist, was elected party chairman, to replace Martin
Mussgnug, who left the party in 1990.
According to the 1993 report of the Office for the
Protection of the Constitution, the party owes the state of
Baden-Wuerttemberg DM438,000 and the Government DM760,000,
exactly the same figures quoted in the 1992 report. The party
is required to repay a proportion of the advances made by the
Government and the state of Baden-Wuerttemberg for election
campaigns, according to paragraph 18 of the Party Law, because
of poor results in the 1990 Federal Parliament elections and
the 1992 regional election respectively.<25>
In 1992 the party was thought to have about 5,000
members, compared with 6,100 in 1991, although the 1993 figure
remains the same as that of 1992. The party would possibly be
looking to increase its membership dramatically in the next
few years, in order either to be in a position to meet its
debts to the authorities, or at least to have a greater
membership base with which to fight the next elections.

5.0 Militant Groups
5.1 The Skinheads

The skinhead movement began in Britain in the late 1960s,
in response to the homeless, hippies and the growing number of
foreigners entering Britain from the Commonwealth. These
original Skinheads or “Skins” meted out their violence at, or
in the vicinity of, football matches and concerts. However, in
1977 a new breed of Skinhead came into existence. The dress
code was the same as before: namely the closely cropped hair,
tattoos, jeans, braces, Doc-Martens boots, bomber jackets, and
T-shirts. This time, though, the “Skins” were much more
politically active and developed and nurtured links with
British right-wing parties. This new generation of Skinhead
soon spread its ideas abroad, principally to the USA, Italy,
Austria, France and also Germany.
Originally, the movement in Germany attacked left-winger
and foreigners, principally Turks. In the mid-80s, the
Skinhead movement in Germany expanded and violence at football
matches increased. After unification, the “Skins” gained
support in theformer East-German states. In 1993 the Office
for the Protection of the Constitution estimated there to be
about 5,600 militant skinheads active in Germany, compared
with 6,400 in 1992, the majority of whom were aged about 20.
According to 1991 statistics, women (called Renees) accounted
for only 3% of the movement (just over 150 people). These,
incidentally, are not required to shave off all of their hair:
only a bit at the back of the head.
Not all “Skins” fall into the category of right-wing
extremists: some groups, such as the Red-Skins or SHARP-Skins
(Skinheads Against Racial Prejudice), even defend the rights
of foreigners. In an interview published in The Guardian
Education, a 24 year old Berliner and SHARP-member, Martin F.,
replied to the question “How should the State react to the
racist attacks?”:

“The problem is the people who cause the trouble, the radical
right-wingers. But the parties that we have now will not solve
this problem. When I hear that the right-wingers from Rostock
are only in jail for two months it makes my skin creep. Such
people should not be judged as criminals but as political
criminals. Then the punishment would be more severe. The
neo-Nazis will continue whilst they have no fear of stricter

However, those groups which are right-wing are
exceptionally so, with ingrained Machiavellian instincts. Such
groups are the so-called “Nazi-Skins”; “Fascho-Skins”;
“White-Power-Skins” or “Boneheads”. In their propaganda, these
groups use Nazi-symbols, such as the Swastika, and slogans,
such as Sieg heil!. Propaganda is also spread in the lyrics
of Skinhead music groups, such as Stoerkraft and Radikahl. The
English band Skrewdriver is also popular in Germany. Their
songs are passed around the Skinheads groups on “demo
cassettes”, because of the cost of producing them, although
some of the better-known bands are able to have records and
compact disks produced.
According to the 1993 report of the Office for the
Protection of the Constitution, many Skinheads are adopting a
more traditional appearance to avoid retaliation from the
foreigners themselves, left-wing extremists, the police and

5.2 Neo-Nazi Groups

According to the reports of the Office for the Protection
of the Constitution, the membership of neo-Nazi groups stood
at 400 in 1975, but rose to 1,400 in 1979. The numbers then
declined until 1983, when there was slow increase in
membership, peaking at 2,100 in 1989 and again in 1991. Such
statistics reflect the banning of one group and the founding
of another, attracting more members. The peaks in membership
seem to be during periods when there were large numbers of
neo-Nazi incidents: the 1979 peak was followed in August 1980
by a fire-bomb attack, which killed two Vietnamese and injured
two Ethiopians and in September 1980 by the bomb at the
However, according to the Infiltration Report of the
Simon Wiesenthal Center, the Government figures for membership
of neo-Nazi groups are underestimated:

” 1. The Freiheitliche Deutsche Arbeiterpartei, run by
notorious neo-Nazi Friedhelm Busse, is estimated by the Office
for Protection of the Constitution at 150 members. Yet while
ingratiating himself with Busse, Ron Furey [the investigator]
was shown Busse’s list – 980 members. Busse even claims he
has thrown out another 150 for alcoholism.
2. While the government estimates that another group, the
Nationale Offensive, has 100 members, Ron Furey found out that
the Dresden area cell alone has 150.
3. Meinolf Schoenborn’s “Nationalistic Front,” which is also
banned, is estimated at 130 members. Schoenborn claims an
infrastructure of 8,600. Even if Schoenborn is overdoing it,
it is apparent from information obtained through an interview
between Ron Furey and Schoenborn that the 130 figure is overly

The chairman of the recently banned neo-Nazi group the
FAP, Friedhelm Busse, described by the Simon Wiesenthal
Center’s Report as someone with “particular power with German
skinheads” and “an advocate of overthrowing the government”28,
expressed the policy of his party at an extraordinary party
conference in Reifenstein/Thueringen on 10th July 1993:

“The aim of the Party is to take total control over Germany.
Should this happen, there will be no concentration camps, but
work-camps, where the enemies of the German people, and above
all foreigners, will carry out useful work. “Enemies” of the
Party, such as police chiefs who have banned events of the
FAP, or newspaper publishers, such as the publisher of “Bild”,
who stir up hatred against the right-wing parties and their
take-over of power, can reckon on being shot.”<29>

Such rhetoric is specifically engineered to be reminiscent of
the Third Reich. The reference to work-camps instead of
concentration camps is an exact copy of Nazi rhetoric: the
NSDAP fooled the population as a whole into believing that
there were no extermination camps. Therefore, it is clear that
the policies of such a group advocate the use of Hitler’s
style of Machtpolitik, or power politics, as do other
organisations, such as the Nationale Liste (NL). Similarly,
they want the German borders of the Prussian Empire, as
demonstrated recently by increased neo-Nazi activity in the
Russian town of Kaliningrad, formerly the East-Prussian
town of Koenigsberg. A publisher from Schleswig-Holstein is
believed to be behind a neo-Nazi organisation calling itself
Aktion Deutsches Koenigsberg.
The neo-Nazis have strong international connections with
Historical Revisionists, as was proven during the Simon
Wiesenthal Center’s operation:

“1. The Center attached an answering machine to a cold line
announcing to any potential caller that he or she had reached
The (fictional magazine) Right Way. This was done to provide
credibility to Ron Furey’s cover should anyone decide to check
up on his persona as a journalist.
On Friday, February 12, 1993, that phone rang – it was
Mark Weber of the Institute for Historical Review, the
notorious organization dedicated to the proposition that the
gas chambers of Auschwitz are a myth. He had called to obtain
a copy of The Right Way. Now, the only people who knew that
number were Ron Furey, the Center’s senior research staff, and
the neo-Nazis in Germany to whom it had been given.
Furthermore, several of these people claimed to know Weber
quite well.”<30>

6.0 Historical Revisionism

This is a prolific school of thought which generates
numerous articles denying the Holocaust. In 1976 Dr. Arthur
Butz published his Revisionist work entitled The Hoax Of The
Twentieth Century. This work, according to Wilkinson:

“… attempts to represent itself as a serious work of
scholarship, complete with the academic apparatus of
footnotes, bibliography, and references to respected
historians of the Holocaust, such as Lucy Dawidowicz and
Gerald Reitlinger.”<31>

It marked the start of a new style of Historical Revisionism,
a style taken up by others, such as David Irving in his book
Hitler’s War.
Perhaps the most infamous Revisionist article is the
Leuchter Report of 1988, after its author, Fred A. Leuchter,
although this report is considered by historians to be based
upon little or no facts whatsoever. Indeed, Leuchter concedes
that hydrocyanic compounds, caused by the extremely poisonous
chemical hydrogen cyanide (HCN) reacting with the
infrastructure of the gas chambers, were to be found at
However, modern advances in communications have enabled
the Revisionists, and indeed, the neo-Nazis, to spread their
message to a wider audience. There is at least one discussion
group on the Internet, where Revisionists try to peddle their
ideas and beliefs, although these are frequently shattered by
historians quoting hard facts.
One article recently published in the “alt.revisionism”
newsgroup of the Internet is an article on “Revisionist
Method”, taken from Pierre Vidal-Naquet’s book Assassins of
Memory (Columbia University Press, 1992). It states that:

“The principles of revisionist method can in fact be
summarized as follows:
1. Any direct testimony contributed by a Jew is either a lie
or a fantasy.
2. Any testimony or document prior to the Liberation is a
forgery or is not acknowledged or is treated as a “rumor.”
3. Any document, in general, with firsthand information
concerning the methods of the Nazis is a forgery or has been
tampered with. […]
4. Any Nazi document bearing direct testimony is taken at
face value if it is written in coded language, but
unacknowledged (or underinterpreted) if it is written
plainly. […]
5. Any Nazi testimony after the end of the year–in trials
either in the West, in Warsaw or Cologne, Jerusalem or
Nuremberg, in 1945 or 1963, is considered as having been
obtained under torture or by intimidation…..
6. A vast pseudotechnical arsenal is mobilized to
demonstrate the material impossibility of mass gassings…..
7. Formerly, God’s existence was proven by the notion that
the existence was contained in the very concept of God. Such
was the famous ‘ontological proof.’ It may be said that for
the ‘revisionists,’ the gas chambers did not exist because
nonexistence was one of their attributes. Such is the
nonontological proof. […]
8. Finally, anything capable of rendering this frightening
story acceptable or believable, of establishing its evolution
or furnishing terms for comparison is either unacknowledged or
falsified. […]

Point number seven in the above list is undoubtedly the
most interesting, proffering a seemingly garbled argument for
Revisionism. Whilst God may be acknowledged as a metaphysical
being, it seems unlikely that this sort of reasoning, when
applied to the existence of the gas chambers, will suddenly
encourage people to accept Revisionist ideas.
Much Revisionist “information” is circulated via more
conventional means through the Noontide Press, The Spotlight
and other journals of the Institute for Historical Review
(IHR), described by Ken McVay as “the moving force in the
movement to deny the Holocaust”.<32> This California-based
organisation was founded by Lewis Brandon, alias William David
McCalden, a founding member of the British National Party
after breaking away from the National Front in 1975. Wilkinson
says of the IHR:

“They go out of their way to sponsor works by neo-Nazis with
bona fide academic degrees or some sort of formal position in
higher education.”<33>

After Brandon/McCalden had left the Institute, Willis
Carto, the ultra-right-wing funder of the Institute, took over
until being forced out in late 1994. The Simon Wiesenthal
Center stated the following about Carto in its report on the
infiltration of neo-Nazi groups in Germany:

“Willis Carto is the most influential professional antisemite
in the United States. He is the founder of Liberty Lobby, the
Institute for Historical Review, the Noontide Press (which
distributes a wide range of racist and antisemitic titles),
and the Populist Party, whose 1988 Presidential candidate was
David Duke. Carto’s name came up in nearly every conversation
held between Ron Furey, S.W.C. researcher, Richard Eaton, and
the neo-Nazis. Literature produced by the Carto organization
is widely read by German’s radical right. In addition,
several of those interviewed know Mr. Carto personally.”<34>

7.0 Extremism in a European Context

Whilst the dynamic rise of right-wing extremism in
Germany in the 1980s is peculiar to Germany, given the rise to
power of the Third Reich in the 1930s, the entire movement
must be set in the context of the resurgence in such extremism
in Europe in general. In other countries, right-wing radical
parties frequently gain significant results in elections, both
European and domestic.
The Italian party Lega Nord gained 8.7% of the vote in
the 1992 parliamentary elections and 8.4% in 1994. Before the
1994 elections, however, Umberto Bossi, the party’s leader,
entered the party into an alliance with Silvio Berlusconi’s
Forza Italia, which placed the Lega Nord in a strong position
with almost twice the seats in parliament, when Forza Italia
formed the government.
In France, the Front National has typically fared well in
European elections, gaining 11.0% in 1984 and11.8% in 1989.
Jean-Marie Le Pen, the party’s leader, gained 14.4% of the
votes cast in the 1988 presidential elections, whilst the
party as a whole gained 9.7% of the parliamentary votes in the
same year. Similarly, in the first round of the presidential
elections on April 23rd 1995, Le Pen gained 15% of the votes
The Austrian Freiheitliche Partei Oesterreichs has been
continually successful at the polls, gaining 9.7% in the 1986
parliamentary elections and 16.6% in 1990, under the
leadership of Joerg Haider. However, in the regional elections
in Vienna in 1991, the party won 22.6% of the votes.
The Vlaams Blok party in Belgium, campaigning for a
corruption-free government, is expected to make substantial
gains at the elections on May 21st 1995. These elections have
been brought forward by seven months, principally as a result
of the corruption and scandal surrounding the “Cools Affair”,
following the murder of Andri Cools, the former deputy prime
minister, and the subsequent resignation of the foreign
minister, Frank Vandenbroucke, and which still threatens to
bring down the Secretary-General of NATO and former finance
minister, Willy Claes.<35>
When such results are compared with those of Die
Republikaner, it can be seen that there is greater public
support for right-wing extremist parties in the rest of Europe
than that shown for the Republikaner. But still Germany
receives greater international publicity for virtually any
incident connected with the far-right, which almost certainly
reflects the dramatic rise of the NSDAP in the 1920s,
transformed from a marginal party into the largest in the
Reichstag by 1933.

8.0 Combatting the Extremists

In 1992 there were two major infiltrations of the
right-wing extremist organisations in Germany by foreign
organisations: the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) and the Simon
Wiesenthal Center (SWC). The SWC investigation was, oddly
enough, carried out by an Israeli journalist, posing as an
Australian, who gained the confidence of several neo-Nazi
figures in Germany, before compiling a report, with the SWC, a
copy of which was forwarded to the German authorities. The
report states in its findings that:

“1. Germany has passed a series of laws over the years to
prevent attempts at Nazi revivalism. These laws are not always
enforced, however. In some cases, neo-Nazis have actually been
tipped off in advance about impending police raids. […]
2. Constantin Mayer leads the Dresden area cell of the
“Nationale Offensive”, a group that was recently banned by the
government. Although Mayer says he is under constant
surveillance, he says he has cordial relations with the police
and conducts his business with them “with a wink and a nod.”
3. Reisz’s brother-in-law operates a video studio in Langen
which produces Nazi propaganda. Yet the studio continues to
4. One woman, a retired police inspector, was presented by
Wolfgang Juchem to Ron Furey and Rick Eaton as an example of
his support among respectable Germans.
5. One neo-Nazi leader, Meinolf Schoenborn, has been raided
by the police on several occasions. They’ve obtained his
computerized membership list – a phoney, prepared in advance
from a local phone directory to confuse the authorities.”<36>

The report also shows there to be errors with the
official estimates of membership of these parties:

“1. The Freiheitliche Deutsche Arbeiterpartei […] is
estimated by the Office for Protection of the Constitution at
150 members. Yet while ingratiating himself with Busse, Ron
Furey was shown Busse’s list – 980 members. […]
2. While the government estimates that another group, the
Nationale Offensive, has 100 members, Ron Furey found out that
the Dresden area cell alone has 150.
3. Meinolf Schoenborn’s “Nationalistic Front,” which is also
banned, is estimated at 130 members. Schoenborn claims an
infrastructure of 8,600. […]”<37>

The authorities are able, given sufficient proof, to
declare a party to be anti-constitutional under article 21,
paragraph 2 of the Basic Law. This states that:

“(2) 1.Parties which, according to their aims or relationship
of their supporters, are intent on interfering with or
removing the free democratic basic order or threatening
the continued existence of the Federal Republic of Germany,
are anti-constitutional. 2.The decision of
anti-constitutionalism lies with the Federal Constitutional

Such an example of this is the recent ban imposed on the FAP.
According to paragraph 33 (Ban of Replacement
Organizations), article 1 of the Party Law:

“It is forbidden to form organizations (replacement
organizations), which persue further anti-constitutional aims
in place of a party banned under article 21, paragraph 2 of
the Basic Law in conjunction with article 46 of the Law of the
Constitutional Court, or to continue existing organizations as
replacement organizations.”

Any offending individuals are liable to forfeit certain
Basic Rights, in accordance with article 18 of the Basic Law,
although such motions have to be initiated by the Bundestag,
the Federal Government or a regional government.
The Office for the Protection of the Constitution is the
official organization charged with monitoring the right-wing
extremist groups, currently with a budget of over 200 million
Marks. Geoffrey K. Roberts sees this office as
“institutionalised wariness” in the light of the 1920s. It has
set up three working parties to investigate the problems of
right-wing extremism: a group on right-wing terrorism; a group
for special measures for fighting right-wing extremism and the
Information Group for the Observation and Combatting of
Right-wing Extremist Violence. The Office for the Protection
of the Constitution can either have a party banned or declared
anti-constitutional, which prevents all members of that party
from working in the civil service, which would otherwise allow
individuals a platform to air their extremist views.

9.0 Public Reaction

Perhaps the most obvious and most violent opposition to
the right-wing extremists comes from the one diametrically
opposed group: the left-wing extremists. The militant
left-wingers have demonstrated against the right-wing
extremists on numerous occasions, most notably after the 1992
rioting in Rostock, where the left-wingers were immediately
arrested when they gathered to attack the right-extremists as
they were attacking a home for asylum seekers. Organised
around the theme Antifaschismus/Antirassismus, there are
several localised groups which take on the right-wing. In 1993
the report of the Office for the Protection of the
Constitution recorded 337 violent attacks on the far-right,
compared with 390 in 1992.
The ordinary citizen has protested vociferously: after
the rioting throughout Germany in 1992, the masses turned out
to show their feelings on the subject in several town and
cities across the country, but especially in those places
where the rioting had occurred. In Berlin on November 8th
1992, the eve of the 54th anniversary of Reichskristallnacht,
the Nazi purge of the Jews, 300,000 people, among them Federal
President Richard von Weizsaecker, protested against right-wing
violence in the Berliner Lustgarten, although the
demonstration was later disrupted by anarchists.<38>

10.0 Conclusion

Whilst it cannot be denied that right-wing extremism and
right-wing violence have increased over the past decade, one
must question the comments of some critics of Germany, that
the Government has just “stood by and watched”. It is a
difficult and dangerous situation which has developed in
Germany, and the utmost care needs to be exercised in dealing
with it, in order to avoid an escalation of the violence and
an increase in the number of subversive groups.
The problem with banning individual parties, as has been
found in the past, is that it simply drives the activities of
the banned group underground, or else, as with the ANS/NA, the
members join a similarly oriented group, such as the FAP.
Additionally, as Manfred Kanther, the Interior Minister,
stated of Die Republikaner, to ban a party is merely to make
martyrs of those in the party hierarchy. Thus, by not banning
the parties, not only does the Government have a much clearer
idea of each individual group and, hence, its membership, but
it is also easier for it to monitor the practices of the
groups and, to a certain extent, to control them.



1. Backes / Jesse; pp 297-298.
2. Wilkinson; p. 99.
3. Wilkinson; p. 111 and Koenigseder, A.; Zur Chronologie
des Rechtsextremismus; in Benz [ed.], 1994.
4. Wilkinson; p. 172.
5. Otto / Merten; p. 16.
6. The Times, Saturday 25th February 1995.
7. Betz; pp 55-64.
8. ibid.; pp 59-60.
9. Informationen zur politischen Bildung nr. 237: Auslaender;
(Bonn, 1992); pp 22-23.
10. Rechtsextremismus in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland –
Allgemeine Entwicklung; Landesamt fuer Verfassungsschutz,
Baden-Wuerttemberg, 1994; p. 24.
11. Kommunalwahlprogramm der Partei DIE REPUBLIKANER zur
Stadtratswahl 1994 in Mainz.
12. ibid.; p.1.
13. ibid.; p.2.
14. Schoenhuber auf dem Bundesprogrammparteitag am 26. Juni
1993 in Augsburg, in Der Republikaner 7/93; in
Rechtsextremismus in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland –
Allgemeine Entwicklung; Landesamt fuer Verfassungsschutz,
Baden-Wuerttemberg, 1994; p. 26.
15. Andreas Juhnke; The hydra-headed monster of Germany in
New Statesman & Society; 4th December 1992; p. 13.
16. Betz; p.136.
17. Roberts; p. 331.
18. German News; Fr. 03.03.95 19:00 MEZ.
19. Roger Boyes; Far-right party saved from ban; in The
Times, 15th April 1994; p. 12.
20. Backes / Jesse; p. 107.
21. Roberts; p. 335.
22. Backes / Jesse; p. 296.
23. Verfassungsschutzbericht 1993; p. 125.
24. Niedersachsen-Spiegel – Deutsche Stimme fuer
Niedersachsen. 3/93; p. 4; in Verfassungsschutzbericht 1993;
p. 126.
25. Verfassungsschutzbericht 1993; p. 130.
26. The Guardian Education; 13th October 1992; p. 12.
27. Simon Wiesenthal Center: Infiltration Report; Findings, B
– Estimates of neo-Nazi membership.
28. Simon Wiesenthal Center: Infiltration Report;
Personalities – Busse, Friedhelm.
29. Verfassungsschutzbericht 1993; p. 106.
30. Simon Wiesenthal Center: Infiltration Report; Findings, D
– International Links.
31. Wilkinson; p. 97.
32. McVay; Holocaust FAQ: Willis Carto & The Institute for
Historical Review; 2.0 Background Information.
33. Wilkinson; p. 97.
34. Simon Wiesenthal Center: Infiltration Report.
35. The Sunday Times News Review, 26th March 1995.
36. Simon Wiesenthal Center: Infiltration Report; Findings, A
– Enforcement of laws.
37. as note 36.
38. Time, November 23rd 1992; pp 42-44.


Backes, Uwe / Jesse, Eckhard; Politischer Extremismus in der
Bundesrepublik Deutschland; (Bonn, 1993).

Benz, Wolfgang [ed.]; Rechtsradikalismus: Randerscheinung oder
Renaissance?; (Frankfurt a.M., 1980).

Benz, Wolfgang [ed.]; Rechtsextremismus in Deutschland.
Voraussetzungen, Zusammenhaenge, Wirkungen; (Frankfurt a.M.,

Betz, Hans-Georg; Radical Right-wing Populism in Western
Europe; (London, 1994).

Dudek, Peter / Jaschke, Hans-Gerd; Entstehung und Entwicklung
des Rechtsextremismus in der Bundesrepublik; 2 Baender;
(Opladen, 1984).

Heitmeyer, Wilhelm; Rechtsextremismus. Warum Handelt Menschen
gegen ihre eigenen Interessen?; (Koeln, 1991).

Heinemann, Karl-Heinz / Schubarth, Wilfried [ed.]; Der
antifaschistische Staat entlaesst seine Kinder: Jugend und
Rechtsextremismus in Ostdeutschland; (Cologne, 1992).

Husbands, Christopher; The Other Face of 1992: The
Extreme-Right Explosion in Western Europe; in Parliamentary
Affairs Vol.45, No.3, July 1992; pp 267-284.

Kowalsky, Wolfgang / Schroeder, Wolfgang [ed.];
Rechtsextremismus. Einfuehrung und Forschungsbilanz; (Opladen,

Leuchter, Fred; The Leuchter Report: The Forensic Examination
of Auschwitz; (London, 1989).

McVay, Kenneth N.; Holocaust FAQ: Willis Carto & The Institute
for Historical Review; (Canada, 1994). Usenet news.answers.
Available via anonymous ftp from in
pub/usenet/news.answers/holocaust/ihr/part01 and part02.

McVay, Kenneth N.; Holocaust FAQ: The Leuchter Report;
(Canada, 1994).

Otto, Hans-Uwe / Merten, Roland [ed.]; Rechtsradikale Gewalt
im vereinigten Deutschland. Jugend im gesellschaftlichen
Umbruch; (Opladen, 1993).

Roberts, Geoffrey K.; Right-wing Radicalism in the New
Germany; in Parliamentary Affairs Vol.45, No.3, July 1992; pp

Wilkinson, P.; The New Fascists; (London, 1981).

The Dignity Report, February 15, 1994; The Coalition for Human
Dignity, P. O. Box 40344, Portland, Oregon 97240.

Grundgesetz mit […] Parteiengesetz 1994; (Munich, 1994).

Fragen und Antworten zum Rechtsextremismus in Deutschland;
Bundesamt fuer Verfassungsschutz (Bonn, 1993).

Links- und Rechtsextremismus in Deutschland -Gemeinsamkeiten
und Unterschiede- Ideologie, Ursachen, Erscheinungsformen;
Bundesamt fuer Verfassungsschutz (Bonn, 1993).

Aktuelle Aspekte des Rechtsextremismus; Bundesministerium des
Innern (Bonn, 1994).

Extremismus und Gewalt in drei Baender; Bundesministerium des
Innern (Bonn, 1993-1994).

Extremismus und Fremdenfeindlichkeit. Band II;
Bundesministerium des Innern (Bonn, 1992).

Verfassungsschutzbericht 1992; Bundesministerium des Innern
(Bonn, 1993).
Verfassungsschutzbericht 1993; Bundesministerium des Innern
(Bonn, 1994).

Rechtsextremistische Einfluesse auf die Skinhead-Subkultur.
Entwicklung – aktuelle Lage – Einschaetzung – Fanzines –
Skinmusik; Bayerisches Landesamt fuer Verfassungsschutz
(Munich, 1993).

Rechtsextremismus in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland –
Allgemeine Entwicklung.; Landesamt fuer Verfassungsschutz
Baden-Wuerttemberg (Stuttgart, 1994).

DVU – Deutsche Volksunion: Organisation – Ziele –
Perspektiven; Landesamt fuer Verfassungsschutz
Baden-Wuerttemberg (Stuttgart, 1992).

Skinheads; Landesamt fuer Verfassungsschutz Rheinland-Pfalz
(Mainz, 1994).

Rechtsextremismus; Landesamt fuer Verfassungsschutz
Rheinland-Pfalz (Mainz, 1994).

New Statesman & Society; 4th December 1992; p.12ff.

The European; 24th-27th June 1993; pp.8-9.

Time, 23rd November 1992; pp 42-44.


German News Service ([email protected]) for the some of the
more recent information.

Reuters News Service.

Times Newspapers Ltd.

United Press International.

Date: Wed, 28 Jun 95 10:39:26 BST
From: Reg Rushton
To: [email protected]
Sender: [email protected]

[Email addresses as of January 1997: [email protected]
and [email protected]]