Peter Hayes, From Cooperation to Complicity (2004)

After I graduated from college in 2007, I ended up with a temp office job at a paint colorants factory in Lockland, Ohio, which was owned by the Degussa Corporation. It was an easy job if you knew how to use Microsoft Word, and I usually found myself with twenty hours worth of work to get done in my forty-hour work week. One day early on when I was bored, I googled the name of the company and ended up reading the Wikipedia article, where I found out that the company was German-owned... and that during World War II, they had manufactured Zyklon-B for the Nazis. You know, the stuff used to gas Jews in concentration camps!

From Cooperation to Complicity: Degussa in the Third Reich
by Peter Hayes

Published: 2004
Read: September 2025

Wikipedia told me this led to some controversy when Degussa had been hired to provide concrete sealant (something like that) for the Holocaust Memorial in Germany: this company had profited both from committing the Holocaust and from apologizing for it. A public outcry had sprung up, but ultimately Degussa completed its contract for the Holocaust Memorial because the project was so far along it would have cost too much money to undo its work and get someone else to do it.

In the short ten months I worked there, the company rebranded itself to "Evonik Industries." There were all sorts of official reasons, but it seemed to me that this was an attempt to divorce itself from its 1940s predecessor. 

I went straight from this job into grad school, so my time working for the "Nazi company" was a common grad school anecdote. Thus, when one of my officemates discovered this book, he told me about; I added it to my reading list, and some eleven years later, I've finally gotten around to reading it.

Peter Hayes is a Holocaust scholar; in the wake of the Holocaust Memorial scandal, he was given access to the Degussa archives to write and publish this book, which attempts to determine to what extent Degussa profited across the Holocaust.

I think probably Hayes is attempting to do something very worthy here, but I found that the book is an onslaught of detail with very little of an overarching narrative. Perhaps this was intentional: I think maybe Hayes wanted you to look at all the evidence he'd amassed and draw your own conclusions. But unfortunately, it makes it a very hard, very dull read. You are given so much information, but it seemed to me, very few answers. We see the results of decisions made, but not how the decisions actually got made, who made them, or why. I found it, ultimately, not a very interesting read, and in its detached, clinical tone, perhaps even a bit of a whitewash.