America's Nazi Nexus
|Back to Investigation|
GM and the Nazis--Part Four: How Will History Remember General Motorsâ€™ Collaboration with the Nazis?
|Edwin Black||June 30th 2008|
The epilogue of the tumultuous saga of General Motors during the New Deal and Nazi era is still being written. That saga is the subject of a four-part investigative series that concludes with this story. Thousands of pages of decadesâ€™-old documents were scrutinized and re-examined to produce this series, which sheds new light on GMâ€™s relationship with the Third Reichâ€”and on the companyâ€™s activities in America. They reveal that even as GM and its president, Alfred P. Sloan, were helping jump-start the resurgent German military, they were undermining the New Deal of Franklin D. Roosevelt and undermining Americaâ€™s electric mass transit, and in doing so helped addict America to oil.
In 1974, a generation after World War II, GMâ€™s controversial history was resurrected by the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committeeâ€™s subcommittee on Antitrust and Monopoly. GM and Opelâ€™s collusion with the Nazis dominated the opening portion of the subcommitteeâ€™s exhaustively documented study, which mainly focused on the companyâ€™s conspiracy to monopolize scores of local mass transit systems in the United States.
The reportâ€™s author, Judiciary Committee staff attorney Bradford Snell, used GMâ€™s collaboration with the Third Reich as a moral backdrop to help explain the automakersâ€™ plan in more than 40 cities to subvert popular clean-running electric public transit and convert it to petroleum-burning motor buses.
The Senate report, titled "American Ground Transport," was released shortly after the Arab-imposed 1973 oil shockâ€”and it accused GM of significantly contributing to the nationâ€™s petroleum woes through its mass-transit machinations.
GM had been convicted in 1949 of leading a secret corporate combine that funded a front company called National City Lines that systematically replaced electric trolleys with oil-guzzling motor buses across America. After Snellâ€™s report was presented, GM immediately went on the counterattack, denying Snellâ€™s charges about both its domestic conduct and its collusion with the Nazis, and demanding that the Senate Judiciary Committee cease circulating its own report. That, of course, did not happen.
But following the release of the Snell report, the automaker then created its own 88-page rebuttal report titled, â€œThe Truth About American Ground Transport,â€ whose entire first section, as it turns out, had nothing to do with American ground transport. It was headlined: â€œGeneral Motors Did Not Assist the Nazis in World War II.â€
GM has also consistently denied domestic wrongdoing.
Thus, GMâ€™s involvement with Nazi transportation in Germany juxtaposed with its conspiracy to convert electric mass transit at home became inextricably linked by virtue of the Senateâ€™s investigation, the companyâ€™s own rebuttal and the compelling historical parallel between the companyâ€™s conduct in the United States and its conduct in Germany.
GM further demanded that the Senate never permit its own report, American Ground Transport, to be distributed without GMâ€™s rebuttal attached. The Senate agreedâ€”a rare move indeed. Snell, however, labeled the GM rebuttal a document calculated to mislead historians and the public.
Yet another generation later, in the late 1990s, GMâ€™s collaboration with the Nazis was again resurrected when Nazi-era slave laborers threatened to sue GM and Ford for reparations. At the time, a GM spokesman told a reporter at The Washington Post that the company â€œdid not assist the Nazis in any way during WWII.â€ The effort to sue GM and Ford was unsuccessful, but both Ford and GM, concerned about the facts that might come to light, commissioned histories of their Nazi-related past.
In the case of Ford, the company issued its 2001 report, compiled by historian Simon Reich, plus the original underlying documentation, all of which was made available to the public without restriction. Ford immediately circulated CDs with the data to the media. Researchers and other interested parties may today view the actual documents and photocopy them. The Reich report concluded, among other things, that Ford-Werke, the companyâ€™s German subsidiary, used slave labor from the Buchenwald concentration camp in 1944 and 1945 and functioned as an integral part of the German war machine. Ford officials in Detroit have publicly commented on their Nazi past, remained available for comment, apologized and have generally helped all those seeking answers about its involvement with the Hitler regime.
As for GM, it commissioned eminent business historian Henry Ashby Turner Jr. in 1999 to conduct an internal investigation and report his findings. Turner, author of several favorably reviewed books, including â€œGerman Big Business and the Rise of Hitler,â€ was well-known, among other things, for his insistence that big business did not make a pivotal contribution to the rise of Hitlerism.
GM, however, declined to release Turnerâ€™s internal report or discuss the companyâ€™s Nazi-era or New Deal-era history or archival holdings when contacted by this reporter. In February 2006, corporate spokeswoman Geri Lama twice refused to give this reporter the location of the company archive. In November 2006, Lama was again asked for an on-the-record response. She said she was referring the question to â€œstaffers,â€ but after more than a week, no reply had been received.
GM has maintained a special combative niche in the annals of American corporate history, achieving a reputation for suppressing books, obstructing access to archival records, and frustrating critics from Ralph Nader to Bradford Snell. GM attorneys even fought efforts by Alfred P. Sloan himself to publish his own memoirs, although the autobiography was finally published in 1964 after a long court fight.
In July 2005, Turner published the book â€œGeneral Motors and the Nazis: The Struggle for Control of Opel, Europeâ€™s Biggest Carmakerâ€ (Yale University Press). The book features 158 chapter text pages of carefully detailed and footnoted information, plus notes, an index and a short appendix. Although the book has been reviewed, BookScan, which tracks about 70 percent of retail book sales for the publishing industry, reported in late October that only 139 copies of the Turner book had been sold to the key outlets monitored by the service since the publicationâ€™s release.
In his book, Turner, relying on his work as GMâ€™s historian, disputed many earlier findings about GMâ€™s complicity with the Nazis, concluding that charges that GM had collaborated with the Nazis even after the United States and Germany were at war â€œhave proved groundless.â€ Turner rejects â€œthe assumption that the American corporation did business in the Third Reich by choice,â€ asserting, â€œSuch was not the case.â€ Turner also states that GM had no option but to return wartime profits to its stockholders, since â€œthe German firm prospered handsomely from Hitlerâ€™s promotion of the automobile and from the remarkable recovery of the German economy.â€
However, Turner does state explicitly that â€œby the end of 1940 more than ten thousand employees at Opelâ€™s Russelsheim plant were engaged in producing parts for the Junkers bombers heavily used in raining death and destruction on London and other British cities during the air attacks of the Battle of Britain.â€ Turner also condemns GM for taking the Opel wartime dividends, which included profits made off of slave labor. He writes, â€œBut regardless of who [in the GM corporate structure] decided to claim that tainted money, its receipt rendered GM guilty, after the fact, of deriving profit from war production for the Third Reich made possible in part from the toil of unfree workers.â€
Aware that questions would arise about his relationship with GM, Turnerâ€™s book states in its preface: â€œThis book was not commissioned by General Motors. It was written after the documentation project was completed and without any financial support from GM. Its contents were seen by no one at GM prior to publication. It is therefore an independent undertaking by the author, who bears sole responsibility for its contents.â€
Turner did not respond to voice mail and e-mail messages seeking information about his sponsored GM history project, his subsequent book, or other relevant topics.
The GM Opel documents assembled for the companyâ€™s probe and Turnerâ€™s commissioned examination were digitized on CD-ROMs and donated to Yaleâ€™s Sterling Memorial Library, where the collection is categorized as being â€œopen to the public.â€ In point of fact, the obscure collection can only be viewed on a computer terminal; print-outs or digital copies are not permitted without the written consent of GM attorneys.
Sterling reference librarians, who are willing to make the collection available, complained to this reporter as recently as October 2007 that they do not know how to access the digitized GM materials because of a complicated and arcane database never before encountered by them. One Sterling reference librarian answered a question about the document by declaring, â€œI have spoken to two reference librarians. No one knows anything about it [the GM Opel Collection], no one is in charge of it. No one knows how to access it.â€
Yale archivist Richard Szary, who supervised the accession of the collection, said that for the approximate half-decade that the documents have been on file, he knows of only â€œone or twoâ€ researchers other than this reporter who have had access to the papers. Szary, who was previously said to be the only Yale staffer who understood how to access the materials, facilitated this reporterâ€™s on-site access. He has since left Yale. By late November, however, in response to an inquiry by this reporter, a senior Sterling librarian said her staff would â€œfigure out how to make it availableâ€ by reviewing technical details.
Simon Reich, who compiled Fordâ€™s Hitler-era documents, bristled at the whole idea. â€œFord decided to take a very public, open and transparent route,â€ he stated. â€œAny serious researcher can go into the [Henry Ford] archive, see the documents in paper form, and have them copied. Compare and contrast this with the fact that GM conducted a very private study and the original hard-copy documentation upon which the study was made has never been made available, and today cannot be copied without the GM legal departmentâ€™s permission.â€
Between the unpublished GM internal investigation, the restricted files at Yale, and the little-known insights offered in Turnerâ€™s book, the details of the companyâ€™s involvement with the Hitler regime have remained below the radar.
Nonetheless, GMâ€™s impact in both the United States and the Third Reich was monumental.
On Jan. 15, 1953, company president Charlie Wilson was nominated to be Secretary of Defense, a job that would ultimately see him usher in the era of the interstate highway system. At Wilsonâ€™s confirmation hearings, Sen. Robert Hendrickson (R-N.J.) pointedly challenged the GM chief, asking whether he had a conflict of interest, considering his 40,000 shares of company stock and years of loyalty to the controversial Detroit firm. Bluntly asked if he could make a decision in the countryâ€™s interest that was contrary to GMâ€™s interest, Wilson shot back with his famous comment, â€œI cannot conceive of one because for years I thought what was good for our country was good for General Motors, and vice versa. The difference did not exist. Our company is too big.â€
Indeed, what GM accomplished in both America and Nazi Germany could not have been bigger.
Edwin Black is the award-winning, New York Times and international bestselling author of IBM and the Holocaust, and six other books, as well as the forthcoming book, Nazi Nexus (Nov 2008 Dialog Press). He can be reached at www.edwinblack.com. This article is adapted from an award-winning series syndicated by the JTA based on Black's book Internal Combustion (St. Martin's Press) as well as additional research.
Edwin Blackâ€™s research for the four-part investigative series, â€œGM and the Nazisâ€
involved the review of documents at Georgetown University; Georgia State University; Henry Ford Museum; Kettering University; National Archives repositories in Chicago and Washington, D.C.; New York Public Library Special Manuscript Collections; Yale University Sterling Memorial Library and other repositories in the United States and Germany. In addition, he had access to confidential FBI files obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, period media reports from both Germany and America, secondary literature and other materials researched to produce his book Internal Combustion: How Corporations and Governments Addicted the World to Oil and Derailed the Alternatives. His secondary sources also included the books: General Motors and the Nazis by Henry A. Turner; Sloan Rules by David Farber and Working for the Enemy by Reinhold Billstein, Karola Fings, Anita Kugler and Nicholas Levis.