The book is about Rotterdam students who joined the resistance against the German occupation. Besides tales from the students themselves, the book also contains many insights into the Netherlands School of Economics at which they were studying. The world of commerce held great sway over the Netherlands School of Economics and attempted to keep the School – as well as commerce in general – running as much as possible during the war.
Pragmatic
Leeman concludes that the School’s board went rather far in its pragmatic approach. “The Netherlands School of Economics, more so than other academic institutions, obstructed resistance against the Germans and normalised the occupation”, writes the author. Among other things, the School fired Jewish professors unprompted. Protests against this were suppressed in coordination with the Germans. “While avowedly politically neutral, opposed to ideology and unwelcoming to members of the National Socialist Movement in the Netherlands (NSB), the Netherlands School of Economics did give free rein to controversial commercial interests by supporting the occupation.”
Those interests lay with the Rotterdam world of commerce, which was closely linked to the Netherlands School of Economics. According to the author, Rotterdam businessman Karel van der Mandele, co-founder and board member of the Netherlands School of Economics, partly made the School an extension of the economic reorganisation under German authority, which aimed to integrate the Dutch and German economies. “Under the leadership of former liberal Van der Mandele, the School aimed to train students for a new planned economy under German leadership.”
The commercialists’ pragmatic approach looked towards a new economic system under German leadership, with the primary goal of securing their own place in the new order. “National socialist ideology was seen as a side effect of the occupation, rather than a serious threat. This underestimation of the ideological considerations ended up turning the School into a puppet of the Nazi regime.”
Those interests lay with the Rotterdam world of commerce, which was closely linked to the Netherlands School of Economics. According to the author, Rotterdam businessman Karel van der Mandele, co-founder and board member of the Netherlands School of Economics, partly made the School an extension of the economic reorganisation under German authority, which aimed to integrate the Dutch and German economies. “Under the leadership of former liberal Van der Mandele, the School aimed to train students for a new planned economy under German leadership.”
The commercialists’ pragmatic approach looked towards a new economic system under German leadership, with the primary goal of securing their own place in the new order. “National socialist ideology was seen as a side effect of the occupation, rather than a serious threat. This underestimation of the ideological considerations ended up turning the School into a puppet of the Nazi regime.”
Fear of liquidation of ownership
According to Leeman, the private ownership of the school also played a major role. The Netherlands School of Economics was founded in 1913 as the Netherlands School of Commerce by Rotterdam entrepreneurs, who funded it with their own capital. In the book, Leeman argues that ‘the fear of the School and its assets being confiscated was always leading, for example when the School broke with the collectively protesting front of private academic institutions in 1943’.
This collective protest was against a pledge of loyalty, which included that the students would not resist the German occupation and would work in Germany for a year. The institutions had agreed not to bring the pledge to the students to be signed or to shut their doors out of protest otherwise, but the management of the Netherlands School of Economics decided to send the pledge to the students anyway out of fear that the School would be closed and its capital liquidated. The Netherlands School of Economics remained open for the duration of the war.
Leeman is surprised that the post-war period did not see more criticism of the board of the Netherlands School of Economics. She believes that Van der Mandele contributed to the myth that the School closed its doors after the loyalty protest in 1943, and that it did so out of moral considerations following a deliberate thought process. According to Leeman, this did not happen and the School remained open for a small number of primarily NSB students. “Noteworthy is the degree to which the School, without significant protest from students, succeeded in maintaining to the present day the myth of a neutral institution that shut its doors out of outrage over the pledge of loyalty.”
Even when Dutch institutions were purged of people who had collaborated with the Germans after the war, the board of the Netherlands School of Economics managed to evade consequences. “Regardless of whether or not the School’s policy was defensible, the neutral, pragmatic and realistic argument weathered the purge and criticism without a scratch.” In 1945, people often even looked down on the attitude of resistance. Throughout the book, Leeman is primarily critical of the fact that Van der Mandele was placed on a pedestal after the war, despite the fact that he was already being criticised in 1945, among others by resistance fighters. For example, the prominent square in front of the Aula on campus Woudestein is named after him.
EUR reaction
Reacting to the revelations in the book, a EUR spokesperson said: “Over the years, various publications and studies about the Netherlands School of Economics and EUR have addressed aspects of this period. The role of its board is subject to constant re-evaluation, both by EUR and by society as a whole.”
EUR will now take the conclusions in De Keien into consideration. “The Executive Board is discussing with the dean and the History department of the Erasmus School of History, Culture and Communication (ESHCC) how these questions can best be answered with the expertise in this area that is available within EUR.” If it is found that there is not enough knowledge on this subject, EUR may commission additional research.
EUR is also looking forward to a dissertation on Van der Mandele that is set to appear in 2025. “This dissertation will critically examine his life. The Second World War and post-war reconstruction period will be a focus of this.” The dissertation is being written by Matthijs Dicke of the ESHCC. “We assume that he will look at everything critically, so that we can come to a well-considered judgement. Until then, we cannot say more about the matter.”
