"March 1939 in Hall: Propaganda, Pathos, and the Politics of Memory"

This commentary analyzes a Nazi propaganda article published on March 14, 1939, in the Innsbrucker Nachrichten, describing political and military rallies held in Hall in Tirol. The article glorifies the Nazi regime, suppresses historical facts about the early resistance movement in Hall — particularly from clerical circles — and omits that political activism by priests had already been banned by Engelbert Dollfuß in 1934. Through highly ideological language, the text promotes Führer worship, militarization, and national unity, while vilifying dissent. Particularly striking is the aggressive rhetoric and warlike staging just months before the outbreak of World War II, revealing the propagandistic fusion of mythicized past, authoritarian present, and militarized future.

Your browser does not support viewing this document. Click here to download the document.

Church and Politics in Hall in Tirol 1933 - 1938

The political changes under the authoritarian government of Engelbert Dollfuß (1892–1934) were clearly felt in Hall in Tirol as well. In 1933, Dollfuß made it clear to Austrian clergymen that he did not want any political involvement from the Church in government affairs. As a result, the Austrian Bishops’ Conference passed a resolution in December of the same year stating that clergy were to withdraw from active politics entirely.
Despite these restrictions, the Church remained closely connected to community life in Hall. One example was the construction of a youth center by Kooperator Lambichler in spring 1933 on the Pletzerwiese meadow. Built for the Catholic Youth Association (Reichsbund), the center was officially opened in March of the same year, attended by Mayor Dr. Kathrein and several members of the town council. The facility, consisting of a wooden building and a spacious playground, provided a place for young people in Hall to gather, play, and receive academic support.
Missionary work also played a role in the local religious life. On October 8, 1933, two priests, Father Franz Schumacher and Father Erwin Bergthaler, were ceremoniously sent off to Bolivia during a special mass held in the Franciscan church.
These examples show that, even in a time of political restrictions, the Catholic Church remained active in Hall’s social and spiritual life — though clearly separated from state politics, in accordance with the expectations of the Austrofascist regime.

March 1939 in Hall: Propaganda, Pathos, and Politicized Memory

The newspaper article published on 14 March 1939 in the Innsbrucker Nachrichten offers a typical example of Nazi propaganda rhetoric that was ubiquitous in public media during the period between Austria’s so-called “Anschluss” in March 1938 and the outbreak of the Second World War in September 1939. The portrayal of public rallies in Hall in Tirol on 13 March 1939 is infused with ideological messaging, revisionist history, and aggressive mobilization.

1. Distorted Historical Narrative and Erasure of Resistance

The article begins with an exuberant description of the Nazi "storm" sweeping through the alleys of a supposedly backward “clerical stronghold.” This phrasing is not only derogatory toward Hall’s Catholic identity but deliberately omits the fact that, even as early as March 1938—and increasingly from 1939 onward—there was clerically influenced resistance to the Nazi regime in the town. Numerous priests, teachers, and laypeople from the Catholic milieu were actively involved in resistance or held critical views.
The article’s portrayal of these groups as mere remnants of a system “swept away overnight” reflects a conscious act of historical erasure. It also ignores that Engelbert Dollfuß, authoritarian chancellor of the Austrofascist Ständestaat, had already banned political activity by priests in 1934 through the so-called Kanzelverbot (pulpit ban) and other repressive measures. While the Nazi regime adopted a similar stance rhetorically, it did so in a highly selective and manipulative way. The article’s claim that National Socialism opposed “politicizing priests” while allegedly respecting the “religiosity of the people” is deeply hypocritical, given the regime’s widespread persecution of clergy.

2. Ideological Saturation of Language

The article is written in a highly ideologized style, adopting the vocabulary of National Socialism: terms like “idea come alive,” “Führer,” “Volksgenossen” (national comrades), “Kameradschaften” (comradeships), and “Reichskriegerbund” (Imperial War Veterans' Association) reflect the total alignment of all aspects of life. The glorification of the Führer cult and the soldier’s sacrificial death fits into the propagandistic narrative of a Volksgemeinschaft—a national community formed through total allegiance to Adolf Hitler.
The speech by Nazi orator Bartsch is a textbook example of NS rhetoric: a blanket rejection of “emotional arguments,” the defamation of all those who did not conform as “schemers,” and the claim that the Nazi movement encompasses “the entire community.” Here, pluralism is dismissed as a threat to the state, while religious and intellectual dissent is disparaged or rhetorically erased.

3. Militarization and Preparation for War

Especially striking is that already in March 1939—six months before the war began—a full-scale military staging takes place in the small town of Hall. The reference to the 1914–1916 conscript cohorts as the first recruits from the Ostmarkinto the “Greater German Wehrmacht” is not only historically misleading but serves to symbolically merge the memory of the First World War with preparations for the coming conflict.
The line “years that ring like clear bells in German history” trivializes the horrors of World War I while glorifying soldierhood as a cornerstone of national identity. This conflation of past and future is typical of Nazi mobilization strategies. The dead of World War I are mythologized as ancestral heroes of a new generation of soldiers, whose willingness to sacrifice is presented as a given.
The war memorial becomes a stage for Nazi self-representation, involving both the Wehrmacht and party organizations—a chilling example of the ideological and military co-optation of public space.

4. Conclusion: A Testament to Totalitarian Glorification

This article serves as a paradigm of how the Nazi regime completely co-opted the media. It legitimizes the system, discredits potential opponents (especially the Church), glorifies military sacrifice, and incites war enthusiasm. That these events occurred on 13 March 1939—exactly one year after the Anschluss—underscores the symbolic manipulation of the date.
Any critical engagement with this text in historical education must expose its ideological patterns, make visible the suppressed voices of resistance, and unmask the twisted logic of Nazi historiography and mobilization.

March 13. 1939: How the Nazis were celebrated