This chapter focuses on Mosley and his pre and postwar activities and affiliations. The sociopolitical realities present in those states as well as the dynamics of their relationship with Germany influenced their reactions; the prevalence of anti-Semitism within their populations also had an effect. Kristallnacht is retrospectively seen as a portent of the Holocaust. Cowling argues that Chamberlain felt he had to ignore events like Kristallnacht in order to maintain a good relationship with Adolf Hitler after the Munich deal was brokered. Parker also highlights the importance of Ogilvie-Forbes’s reaction to the events. The issue of naturalization also shows an acceptance of the idea that any Jewish refugees were still very much foreigners. Robert Skidelsky broke with Benewick’s interpretation of fascism and anti-Semitism in Britain, arguing that anti-Semitism was not central to Mosley’s politics despite his fascism. The official policy of Mosley’s postwar Union Movement (UM) was explicitly not anti-Semitic.
|Title of host publication||Violence, Memory and History|
|Subtitle of host publication||Western Perspectives of Kristallnacht|
|Editors||Colin McCullough, Nathan Wilson|
|Number of pages||18|
|Publication status||Published - 15 Sep 2014|
|Name||Routledge Studies in Modern European History|