{"title":"帝国回旋镖:统治德国英属占领区,1945-1949","authors":"Camilo Erlichman","doi":"10.1177/02656914251349738","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Military occupation and imperial domination have often been regarded as two distinctive ruling systems. This article calls this dichotomy into question and looks at how imperial ruling techniques informed occupation practices in mid-twentieth-century Europe. Through an analysis of the British occupation of north-western Germany after the Second World War, the article provides an in-depth exploration of the imperial experiences, imaginaries, and discourses of some of the key officials involved in the British Military Government, tracing how their imperial store of knowledge shaped their attitudes in Germany. In doing so, the article concentrates on the lineages of ‘indirect rule’, which became the central ruling strategy of the occupation authorities. It then explores its implementation on the ground through the system of local <jats:italic>Kreis Resident Officers</jats:italic> . In a final step, the article assesses the larger impact of this ruling technique on different social groups in the British Zone, including German officials, trade unionists, and clergymen. The article argues that the British decision to use a specific set of notables as social intermediaries had significant socio-political consequences. The application of indirect rule led to the suspension of the political process and allowed for the resurgence of local notable elites who had seen their power marginalized by the emergence of mass politics in the previous decades. With the end of occupation and the re-establishment of effective state authority, the social winners of the occupation used their novel influence to dominate national politics. The article contends that the marriage of occupation and imperial ruling techniques had a strikingly conservative impact that may help to explain the distinctive character of the post-war political order.","PeriodicalId":44713,"journal":{"name":"European History Quarterly","volume":"18 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Imperial Boomerang: Ruling the British Zone of Germany, 1945–1949\",\"authors\":\"Camilo Erlichman\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/02656914251349738\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Military occupation and imperial domination have often been regarded as two distinctive ruling systems. This article calls this dichotomy into question and looks at how imperial ruling techniques informed occupation practices in mid-twentieth-century Europe. Through an analysis of the British occupation of north-western Germany after the Second World War, the article provides an in-depth exploration of the imperial experiences, imaginaries, and discourses of some of the key officials involved in the British Military Government, tracing how their imperial store of knowledge shaped their attitudes in Germany. In doing so, the article concentrates on the lineages of ‘indirect rule’, which became the central ruling strategy of the occupation authorities. It then explores its implementation on the ground through the system of local <jats:italic>Kreis Resident Officers</jats:italic> . In a final step, the article assesses the larger impact of this ruling technique on different social groups in the British Zone, including German officials, trade unionists, and clergymen. The article argues that the British decision to use a specific set of notables as social intermediaries had significant socio-political consequences. The application of indirect rule led to the suspension of the political process and allowed for the resurgence of local notable elites who had seen their power marginalized by the emergence of mass politics in the previous decades. With the end of occupation and the re-establishment of effective state authority, the social winners of the occupation used their novel influence to dominate national politics. The article contends that the marriage of occupation and imperial ruling techniques had a strikingly conservative impact that may help to explain the distinctive character of the post-war political order.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44713,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European History Quarterly\",\"volume\":\"18 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European History Quarterly\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/02656914251349738\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"历史学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European History Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/02656914251349738","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Imperial Boomerang: Ruling the British Zone of Germany, 1945–1949
Military occupation and imperial domination have often been regarded as two distinctive ruling systems. This article calls this dichotomy into question and looks at how imperial ruling techniques informed occupation practices in mid-twentieth-century Europe. Through an analysis of the British occupation of north-western Germany after the Second World War, the article provides an in-depth exploration of the imperial experiences, imaginaries, and discourses of some of the key officials involved in the British Military Government, tracing how their imperial store of knowledge shaped their attitudes in Germany. In doing so, the article concentrates on the lineages of ‘indirect rule’, which became the central ruling strategy of the occupation authorities. It then explores its implementation on the ground through the system of local Kreis Resident Officers . In a final step, the article assesses the larger impact of this ruling technique on different social groups in the British Zone, including German officials, trade unionists, and clergymen. The article argues that the British decision to use a specific set of notables as social intermediaries had significant socio-political consequences. The application of indirect rule led to the suspension of the political process and allowed for the resurgence of local notable elites who had seen their power marginalized by the emergence of mass politics in the previous decades. With the end of occupation and the re-establishment of effective state authority, the social winners of the occupation used their novel influence to dominate national politics. The article contends that the marriage of occupation and imperial ruling techniques had a strikingly conservative impact that may help to explain the distinctive character of the post-war political order.
期刊介绍:
European History Quarterly has earned an international reputation as an essential resource on European history, publishing articles by eminent historians on a range of subjects from the later Middle Ages to post-1945. European History Quarterly also features review articles by leading authorities, offering a comprehensive survey of recent literature in a particular field, as well as an extensive book review section, enabling you to keep up to date with what"s being published in your field. The journal also features historiographical essays.