HITLER – A WEAK DICTATOR OR MASTER OF
THE THIRD REICH?
Nigina, Natalia, Maliha
2 OPPOSING VIEWS
• Intentionalists (orthodox view)
• Structuralists (revisionist view)
INTENTIONALISTS
Saw Hitler as Master of the Third Reich.
•
He made the essential decision
•
Supreme judge of the Nation
•
Commander of the army
•
was head of state
•
Clear policy
•
Hitlerism
A SUCCESSFUL PROPAGANDA CAMPAIGN…?
•
[It can be said that intentionalists to somewhat extent fell to Hitler’s clever propaganda
campaign]
•
influenced by evidence of victims, opponents, trials of Nazi war criminals
•
Hugh Trever-Roper
•
Alan Bullock
STRUCTURALISTS
•
Saw Hitler as “weak”
•
No clear planning, no consistent direction
•
Leadership chaos
•
Failure of “divide and rule” strategy
•
Internal anarchy
A REALISTIC VIEW...?
•
Accepted image of all powerful personality BUT pointed to overlapping bureaucracies
•
Stressed administrative inefficiency + impulsiveness of Hitler
•
Hans Momsen
•
Martin Broszat
•
Hitler – a prisoner?
INTENTIONALISTS’ ARGUMENTS
•
NO DECISION OF HITLER’S WAS EVER BLOCKED OR IGNORED
•
He achieved every aim he made
•
Alan Bullock: “It’s not what Hitler said, it’s the way he said it”
•
Trevor-Roper - Hitler genuinely believed what he told the German people
STRUCTURALISTS’ ARGUMENTS
•
1935 sided with industrialists over wages
•
avoided unpopular decisions
•
Mommsen – “Hitler – propagandist, image maker, opportunist”
•
Dependent on obscure people, made them Gauleiter
•
POLYRATIC SYSTEM
•
Broszat - Hiter – “compliant creature”
HITLER’S RELATIONSHIP WITH OTHER NAZIS
• Always traveled with an entourage of Nazi
members
• Gauleiters and Reichsleiters
• Appointed people based hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
on what they could
contribute and not on
friendships
INTENTIONALIST VIEW
•
System of rewards and punishment
•
He was the dominant focal point
•
Had superior talents confirmed by his struggle for power
•
Brought all elements together so they came from him
•
Demanded obedience from all
•
Not even top officials were immune
•
Encouraged feuding
• Helped him solidify power
•
Always suspected his opposition
STRUCTURALIST VIEW
•
Prisoner of others
• “Influence din the strongest fashion by his current entourage, in some respects, a
great dictator.” Hans Mommsen
•
Failing to give clear planning and consistent decision
• Hans Mommsen “Hitler was just one extreme
element of extensive malevolence of the Nazi
system”
• Goebbels
POLICY MAKING AND HITLER
•
Was central in the elimination of Jews
•
Led to SS development and increase in power
•
Was central in the war involvement of 1939
•
Kershaw – Hitler had 3 functions: integrate different antagonistic groups, mobilize and
legalize the actions of his subordinates
•
“Hitler was not a weak dictator, but he certainly wasn’t omnipotent”
•
Hitler’s decision-making was important in 4 ways:
1. Collapse of the international order
2. Growth of an ideological executive force in Germany
3. Disintegration of the ordered state
4. Dropping of civilized restraints
INTENTIONALIST VIEWS OF HITLER'S POLICY
MAKING
•
See Hitler as principle author of decisions in the 3 rd Reich
•
Ideology = key to policy-making
•
Didn’t actually produce many domestic policies, but was persistent
•
Made aims for Germany clear to both the public and the Nazis
•
The theory of Social Darwinism
•
Mein Kampf: Outlines policies on a very basic level, mirroring ideology
STRUCTURALIST VIEW
•
David Irving, Timothy Mason, Hans Mommsen
•
Emphasize unsystematic provision of policies
•
Stress the absence of a single source of policy
•
“Laissez-faire” approach Kershaw
•
Emphasize uncoordinated power struggle and competition between power lords: Goering
and Himmler
•
Mommsen: “Hitler left it up to his subordinates to make decisions on his behalf”
•
One of the most infamous anti-Jew measures of the 3rd Reich: Kristallnacht, 9 November,
1938
CONCLUSION
•
Hitler ruled through his trusted henchmen, but could not ignore his dependence on the
traditional elites who ruled over the army, civil service, and judiciary sector basically on
his own behalf
•
By means of a polycratic government, Hitler’s personal authority was only one element
amongst this complex Nazi power structure
•
Hitler expected total loyalty and all power rested with him at the end of the day