Hitler: ‘master in Hitler: ‘master in the Third Reich’the Third Reich’or ‘weak dictator’?or ‘weak dictator’?

Debate

The issuesThe issues

What is the role of the individual in What is the role of the individual in shaping the course of historical shaping the course of historical development, as against the development, as against the limitations on the individual’s limitations on the individual’s freedom?freedom?

The issuesThe issues

Debate focuses on ‘whether the terrible Debate focuses on ‘whether the terrible events of the Third Reich are chiefly to events of the Third Reich are chiefly to be explained through the personality, be explained through the personality, ideology, and will of Hitler, or whether the ideology, and will of Hitler, or whether the Dictator himself was not at least in part a Dictator himself was not at least in part a (willing) ‘prisoner’ of forces, of which he (willing) ‘prisoner’ of forces, of which he was the instrument rather than the was the instrument rather than the creator, and whose dynamic swept him creator, and whose dynamic swept him too along in its momentum’. Kershaw.too along in its momentum’. Kershaw.

The historiographyThe historiography

The historiographical positions are graphically polarized in The historiographical positions are graphically polarized in the frequently-cited comment of American historian the frequently-cited comment of American historian Norman RichNorman Rich – ‘the point cannot be stressed too – ‘the point cannot be stressed too strongly: Hitler was master in the Third Reich’, strongly: Hitler was master in the Third Reich’,

and in the diametrically opposed interpretation of and in the diametrically opposed interpretation of Hans MommsenHans Mommsen, of a Hitler ‘unwilling to take decisions, , of a Hitler ‘unwilling to take decisions,

frequently uncertain, exclusively concerned with frequently uncertain, exclusively concerned with upholding his prestige and personal authority, upholding his prestige and personal authority, influenced by the strongest fashion by his current influenced by the strongest fashion by his current entourage, in some aspects a weak dictator’.entourage, in some aspects a weak dictator’.

Hitler’s power: an Hitler’s power: an evaluationevaluation

What were Hitler’s ‘strengths’ and What were Hitler’s ‘strengths’ and ‘weaknesses’ within the ‘overall power ‘weaknesses’ within the ‘overall power constellation in the Third Reich?constellation in the Third Reich?

Possible weaknesses (1)Possible weaknesses (1)

Hitler was ‘weak’ in the sense that he Hitler was ‘weak’ in the sense that he regularly shirked making decisions, and regularly shirked making decisions, and was compelled to do so in order to was compelled to do so in order to protect his own image and prestige, protect his own image and prestige, dependent upon the Fuhrer remaining dependent upon the Fuhrer remaining outside factional politics and outside factional politics and unassociated with mistaken or unpopular unassociated with mistaken or unpopular decisions.decisions.

Possible weaknesses (2)Possible weaknesses (2)

Hitler could be regarded as ‘weak’ if it Hitler could be regarded as ‘weak’ if it could be shown that his decisions were could be shown that his decisions were ignored, watered-down, or otherwise not ignored, watered-down, or otherwise not properly implemented by his properly implemented by his subordinates.subordinates.

Possible weaknesses (3)Possible weaknesses (3)

It might be claimed that Hitler was ‘weak’ It might be claimed that Hitler was ‘weak’ in that his scope for action, his in that his scope for action, his manoeuvrability, was preconditioned and manoeuvrability, was preconditioned and limited by factors outside his control but limited by factors outside his control but immanent to the ‘system’, such as the immanent to the ‘system’, such as the demands of the economy or fear of social demands of the economy or fear of social unrest.unrest.

Chaos in governmentChaos in government

No fundamental disagreement over the No fundamental disagreement over the fact that the government of Nazi fact that the government of Nazi Germany was chaotic in structure. The Germany was chaotic in structure. The fragmentation and lack of co-ordination in fragmentation and lack of co-ordination in the internal spheres of authority can be the internal spheres of authority can be aptly depicted as ‘chaotic’. The question aptly depicted as ‘chaotic’. The question is, what significance should be attached is, what significance should be attached to this chaos?to this chaos?

IntentionalistIntentionalist

The confused lines of authority in the The confused lines of authority in the Third Reich was a reflection of a Third Reich was a reflection of a calculated policy of calculated policy of ‘divide and rule’‘divide and rule’. .

This was testimony of Hitler’s pivotal role, This was testimony of Hitler’s pivotal role, his real power and his preconceived his real power and his preconceived planning with a view to carrying out his planning with a view to carrying out his long-term objectives.long-term objectives.

v. ‘structuralist’ v. ‘structuralist’

The confused nature of government was The confused nature of government was the inevitable product of Hitler’s the inevitable product of Hitler’s charismatic leadership.charismatic leadership.

Hitler rejected the institutional and Hitler rejected the institutional and bureaucratic norms necessary for bureaucratic norms necessary for ‘rational’ government of a modern state in ‘rational’ government of a modern state in favour of dependence on personal loyalty favour of dependence on personal loyalty as the basis of authority.as the basis of authority.

‘‘Structuralist’Structuralist’

Used propaganda to avoid any harmful Used propaganda to avoid any harmful inroads into the prestige and image of the inroads into the prestige and image of the Fuhrer and needed to remain aloof from Fuhrer and needed to remain aloof from interference in internal conflicts.interference in internal conflicts.

A lack of clear, rational ‘middle-range’ A lack of clear, rational ‘middle-range’ policies and a diminishing sense of policies and a diminishing sense of reality all promoted instability of the reality all promoted instability of the political system and led to negative goals political system and led to negative goals and and cumulative radicalizationcumulative radicalization..

‘‘structuralist’structuralist’

Hitler’s personal scope for action was Hitler’s personal scope for action was limited by the continued existence of limited by the continued existence of other, real – if fluctuating – centres of other, real – if fluctuating – centres of power.power.

Your jobYour job

Evaluate the evidence for how Nazi Germany was run Evaluate the evidence for how Nazi Germany was run and decide which side of the debate you find most and decide which side of the debate you find most convincing.convincing.

You will investigate:You will investigate: Hitler’s personality – the ‘Hitler myth’Hitler’s personality – the ‘Hitler myth’ How decisions were taken in Nazi Germany.How decisions were taken in Nazi Germany. The way in which policies were carried out – were they The way in which policies were carried out – were they

intentional, or a case of cumulative radicalisation?intentional, or a case of cumulative radicalisation? Rival centres of power in the Third Reich e.g. Rival centres of power in the Third Reich e.g.

traditional power structures; the Nazi Party; the SS and traditional power structures; the Nazi Party; the SS and GestapoGestapo