Profile — Dr Tina Hess
The textile family that
chose to look back
The Schöpflin family operated a textile manufacturing business in the Lörrach region of Baden — the area of southwestern Germany where the country's borders meet Switzerland and France — from the mid-nineteenth century onwards. During the Nazi period the company was formally classified as having profiteers among its principal owners: party members who benefited from the suppression of competition, access to forced labour, and the broader economic advantages available to firms whose principals were integrated into the Nazi patronage system.
The Wartime Record
Textile manufacturing was among the industries that benefited most systematically from the Nazi economic order. The dissolution of independent trade unions, the suppression of wage competition, the availability of forced labour from occupied territories, and the acquisition of confiscated Jewish-owned factory capacity all flowed to German textile manufacturers who were sufficiently integrated into the system to access these advantages. The Schöpflin family's principal owners held NSDAP membership and used these mechanisms.
The Schöpflin Foundation's commissioned historical review (2006–09) confirmed that the company's wartime principal owners had NSDAP membership and that the firm benefited from the Nazi economic framework, including access to forced labour. The review was conducted by an independent historian without conditions on publication.
Hans W. Schöpflin and the Decision to Look Back
Hans W. Schöpflin, a grandson of the wartime generation, moved to the United States and built a career as a venture capitalist and technology investor. In 2006 — without having been exposed by journalism, without facing legal proceedings, and without any public pressure to do so — he commissioned an independent historical investigation into the family's Nazi-era past through the Schöpflin Foundation.
The investigation was conducted by an external historian under conditions that did not give the family control over its conclusions. The resulting report confirmed party membership and wartime profiteering. It was published. Hans Schöpflin subsequently acknowledged the findings publicly.
This is unusual in every respect. Among the families in this study, the pattern is consistent: investigation follows exposure. The Quandts were investigated after a television documentary. The Oetkers commissioned their review after growing public pressure. The Reimanns disclosed only after newspaper investigation. The Schöpflin family is the single exception — they looked for the history before anyone forced them to.
Assessment
The Schöpflin case is significant not because the wartime record is especially severe — among Category I families it sits toward the less extreme end — but because of what it demonstrates about choice. Accountability, this case suggests, is available. It requires only that a family decide to pursue it. The Schöpflins decided. Almost no one else in this register has. The contrast is not flattering to the others.
Dr Hess's Assessment
"The Schöpflin family is the only dynasty in Category I to commission a historical investigation without being first exposed by journalism or legal proceedings. That act of voluntary accountability does not erase what happened. But it distinguishes them from every other family in this register."