Hitler made these laws and the German people for the most part followed them because, like Hitler, they shared a hatred for Jews and Communists and many of the other groups hated by the Nazis. Also, if a person did not fit into the social norms of Germany at that time, they could very easily be subject to the most severe peer pressure imagionable: that ending in death (Mr. Belk). If someone failed to allow these peer pressures to rule all related aspects of life, they could be arrested and killed by Hitler's soldiers, many of which took an oath directly to Hitler. Hitler also increased the military budget so much that the military was never even able to spend all of it.
Also, unlike many governments before him, he did not make any promises to the German people about what exact changes were going to take place. He only told them that he was going to make Germany great again and bring back the national pride. This way, the German people did not hear what they were already very tired of hearing: "I promise..." and then the promise not being kept. Plus, the german people could never say that he didn't go through with what he said he would go through with because he never said he was going to do anything in particular.
With these examples and reasons, Hitler used totalitarianism, and by that, the military, to keep himself in power, his people happy since they were finally able to let their frustration out on a scapegoat.
Jonah Luc...I can tell that you have a great knowledge of the work and that you have made a great attempt at analyzing the question very well. But there is quite a few things that your paper is missing, and in order to achieve the higher ends of the markband, these things are needed. You must find some type of way that historians can use to oppose your thoughts, and present it. How can a historian oppose what you think about Hilter maintaining his power? Some historians may believe that Hitler was using his method to reform Germany and put it in its best state...just think about the different ways that others may oppose your opinion....and a little more analysis is need, of coarse you may never go wrong with more analysis. :) Overall I would give your essay a 10 :)
ReplyDeleteInitially I would agree that Hitler maintained his regime through totalitarianism because that was my response my post. However, do not not think the people willingly allowed Hitler to control their lives? Therefore, Hitler did not have to use force to maintain his regime because German citizens excitedly gave reports to the Gestapo, they felt compelled to share the same hatred of Jews as Hitler, and they took an oath directly to him because they appreciated the order, not because they were afraid.
ReplyDeleteYou said that the people hated Jews just like Hitler did. But was Hitler not the one who instigated antisemetic beliefs? I can't tell if you are suggesting that Hitler forced his beliefs on the people or if the German people agreed with him on their own free will. I think antisemitism already existed in Germany on a small scale and Hitler used propoganda to make it more popular. At the beginning of your blog you said Hitler used totalitarian methods to maintain control of Germany. However, by the end i feel like you think the people were happy with his leadership. So would that not be dictatorship with consent?
ReplyDeleteI agree with most of what you're saying but with Hitler's expansion of the military budget it wasn't just to have a large budget. It was a part of rearmament and helping to build the German economy back up. You obviously have knowledge but a lot of your thoughts are unclear, so its difficult to follow your thoughts. You should include alternate perspectives to make your argument stronger.
ReplyDeleteOkay, Jonah..
ReplyDeleteWith how you started, you skipped over a lot of the details with concentration camps. Your whole paper is very implicit actually. I agree with your beginning paragraph, but your other support does not justify saying Hitler was a totalitarian leader. Building up a military does not mean that he was using totalitarianism, it just means he wanted to build up the country, after the TOV, there was a lot to do to restore Germany to its former "glory" Also, didn't the fact that the gestapo need so few members show that Hitler didn't really need totalitarian methods?
I also don't understand how not making promises show totalitarianism. Hitler used the willingness of his followers to avoid the use of such measures.
All in all, I agree that Hitler used totalitarian methods, but you do not show enough support of that, and you show no real attempt at a counter argument.
I was going to comment exactly what Neely said.
ReplyDeleteYou said, "the German people for the most part followed them because, like Hitler, they shared a hatred for Jews" I don't believe that the German people had a racist view of the German people before Hitler came into power. The antisemitism spread rapidly through many forms of false propaganda after Hitler became chancellor. The hysteria grew rapidly because people were selfish and thought of only bettering their own lives at the cost of another's life.
Also, your thesis is that Hitler used a totalitarian government to control Germany, but you did not mention much evidence past the military and the Gestapo. What other things constituted a totalitarian rule under Hitler?
Ok, your paper is very….this may be mean, but facty….and hardly that. You skip a lot of good details, and you don’t analyze a thing. Your facts don’t exactly support your position, they simply say a very tiny bit of what was Hitler did in Germany at the time. You also don’t acknowledge another side, so really you are not proving a side to an argument. When you say, “Hitler made these laws and the German people for the most part followed them because, like Hitler, they shared a hatred for Jews and Communists and many of the other groups hated by the Nazis.” Would that not be a dictatorship by consent?? The people have Hitler’s views, so they allow him to do the things he does. They name their neighbors out, allowing them to be killed.
ReplyDeleteSorry Jonah but im gonna have to agree with Jennifer about your paper being very factual like a narrative. I also dont agree with your point about there being anti-semitism before Hitler. Im sure people liked Jews before Hitler. They married each other, watched movies made by jews, evn had politicians that were jewish. But if they did share his views of anti-semitism then wouldnt they be willing for him to be a dictator. Sorry man
ReplyDeleteIm sorry Luc but im going to have to go with Ian and Jennifer on this one and say that I find this post extremely implicit in nature. I might even say that you veer off topic. The purpose of the question you chose is to discuss Hitler's use of totalitarianism. Although it seems like you attempted this, I feel as if you do not have a proper understanding of what totalitarianism is. In this kind of government, the single party ruler attempts to control EVERY aspect of life. Although I can think of countless examples of this in the case of Hitler, you have chosen to focus on Hitler's anti-semitic views and his control of the military. Although these facts are true, it seems like you are only nipping at the bud off an extremely elaborate topic.
ReplyDelete