Albert Speer's Historiographical Analysis

Hans Mommsen’s book, From Weimar to Auschwitz, presented an interesting look at Hitler within the Nazi Party. The overriding themes in the chapter “Hitler’s Position in the Nazi System” were the stubbornness and charisma of Hitler and the chaos within the Nazi Party. The weak leadership of Hitler along with the inability to concentrate power to one position helped lead the Third Reich to be a very frenzied and unorganized government.

While Hitler was the leader of the Third Reich, the functionalists believed that the ‘road to Auschwitz’ was characterized by an indirect unplanned path that was defined by cumulative radicalization of the Nazis due to the prevalence of chaotic decision-making processes that were a major feature of the polycratic system of governance. Additionally, this system was characterized by the elimination of individuals considered as destructive to the Nazi movement, leading to the creation of a movement that was ready to do anything to achieve a ‘final solution’ to the ‘Jew problem’. Karl Schleunes falls in this school of thought. Karl Schleunes argument, like that of other functionalists, was cemented on institutions and structure of the Third Reich. With the intentionalists arguing that the Holocaust was the fulfillment of Hitler’s plan hatched in the 1920s, their argument was summer up as the ‘straight road to Auschwitz.’ For functionalists, however, the path to the Holocaust was not straight, a reason why Karl Schleunes labeled his book The Twisted Road to

Of the four historians, it is Kershaw, Goldhagen, and Peukert who propose the idea that the holocaust was a long-term plan and Berghahn who argues that it was a reaction to the circumstances brought about by expansion during world war two. All of the historians agree to a certain degree that the extermination of the Jewish people from Germany was a long term idea of Hitler’s, but it is at the point where ‘idea’ becomes ‘plan’ that they differ.

In spite of the fact that it is a commonly known historical piece of the Holocaust, it’s authenticity has been questioned. Some conspiracies deny that it even happened at all. Through the analyzation of Hitler’s own violent anti-Semitism, powerful position, and ability to convey Nazi propaganda into action, one can see how he is the sole cause of the Holocaust.

Albert Speer was born in 1905 into an upper-middle class family. His family’s wealth provided the opportunity to extend his education at a university level despite the depths of the depression in 1930. After graduating with a degree in architecture, Speer was introduced to the policies of the Nazi Party; however, it did not leave a great impression due to his liberal upbringing. It wasn’t until December 1930 that he attended a party rally and saw Hitler speak; he was instantly mesmerised by his presence and confidence during a time of political

The extent to which Albert Speer had a positive impact upon his time are both varied and constantly changing. From the German perspective, Speer had a positive impact upon the Regime, as exemplified through his work as Architect and Armaments Minister. The allied, international perspective in contrast is quite negative, as it has evolved over time. Despite initial praise, as seen in the repentant Nazi argument, the release of the Walters Chronic and other revelations saw shift towards the structuralist view for the allies, of which Speer had a profoundly negative impact upon society, in which it became to be known that he had full knowledge of the atrocities of the Nazi regime, and the contribution that his department was having upon this.

Albert Speer at his peak was the Armaments Minister from 1942 until the end of World War Two, before this he held key roles such as the First Architect of the Reich. His significance to the Nazi regime meant that he had a large potential to positively impact Germany, however through key events such as the use of slave labour in war manufacturing, the removal of the Berlin Jews in April 1939, the continuation of the war by two additional years, the positive impact was counteractive and caused a large negative impact on Germany. However Speer did make a positive impact through his architecture and disobedience to Hitler’s Scorched Earth policy in 1942. As well as his apology and acceptance of guilt to the horrors of the Nazi regime, Speer did have a positive impact, however, these can be viewed as minuscule compared to the negatives. Thus resulting in Speer having a predominantly negative effect on Germany as opposed to a positive one.

Albert Speer’s significant contribution towards history can be assessed in two sections. His contribution on a national scale consisted of his role as Hitler’s architect to encourage the perception of the Nazi Party to the German people, his position of Armaments Minister and his reorganisation of the industry to maximise production and through his defiance to Hitler’s scorched earth policy. His dedication to the Nazi Party effected history on an international level. Through his involvement with anti-semitic activities and his admission of collective responsibility changed the way a “war criminal” is seen throughout history.

Albert Speer, Architect by trade, Hitler devotee and personal favourite, Government Minister in Nazi Germany and the one who slipped through the hangman’s rope at the Nuremberg Trials. A controversial man of the 20th Century whose overall contribution and legacy in relation to the ‘grand stage of history’ has fueled an enormous debate amongst historians around his legitimacy in the Nazi Regime. It is often said “individuals are a product of their time”. Was Speer’s timing unfortunate or was he just a self-serving technocrat?

In his memoirs entitled Inside Third Reich Albert Speer depicts his time as Adolf Hitler’s head architect and a very close personal friend. Their friendship lasted nearly 12 years ending when HItler committed suicide in his bunker. After the war Speer was certain that he would be sentenced to death by hanging like many of the other nazi generals were. Instead he was sentenced to a 20 year sentence in Spandau prison. He was granted this sentence and not death because of his convincing case he made at the Nuremberg trials. Speer claimed that he had was aware of the use of Jews as unpaid slaves, however he was unaware of the Final Solution(1) or the horrendous conditions in the labor camps. Yet the Gauleiter of Thuringia, Ernst Sauckel reported

Under a tyrant’s commands, who seemed to have no human morality, one man felt remorse for the things he did, or so he made us think. Dan van der Vat uses tone to show skepticism towards Albert Speer’s true intentions during his run with the Nazi regime. In his novel, The Good Nazi: The Life and Lies of Albert Speer Dan van der Vat goes over all of Albert speer’s, a top-ranking Nazi officer and Hitler’s closest friend, life and decisions. The author uses tone to show Speer’s feelings towards the party, the feelings of those around Speer, and to show suspicions of Speer's claims and intentions. In Dan van der Vat's novel, The Good Nazi, the author displays Albert Speer's human element with an inspective tone.

Imagine being a German citizen living in the same era as one of the most notorious and high ranking officers in Nazi Germany’s history. This was the case for many citizens of their proud Nazi Germany and the prisoners, POWs (Prisoners of War) , and criminals that had to face the wrath of Heinrich Himmler. Heinrich grew up in a Roman-Catholic conservative family, where he experienced difficulties in life, and eventually became a political activist. He grew up to become one of the most notorious high-ranking officials in Nazi history. Heinrich’s life and role influenced the outcome of Nazi Germany and history.

Through the analysis of events and constructions relating to the works of Speer and Hitler, it can be clearly seen that, unlike Krier’s statements to the contrary, the works constructed during the Nazi period cannot be separated from their political surroundings and must be observed and examined within their political context. By recounting events within the Nazi regime relating to the constructions and building works of the regime it becomes clear that the works are not only intrinsically linked to the political context, but are a means in order to expand and concentrate political ideology.

Spiegelman viewed Hitler, the architect of the policy of dehumanizing the Jewish people during the Holocaust, as his collaborator in Maus I and Maus II. In an interview with The New York Review of Books, Art Spiegelman was asked why he considers Hitler to be one of his collaborators for the creation of his novels Maus I and Maus II. The reason he considers Hitler as a collaborator was that most of the propaganda that Hitler created was used dehumanize the Jewish people as rats, this was Spiegelman’s inspiration for both Maus I and Maus II. During the Interview with the NYRB when Spigelman was asked which Nazi propaganda he viewed as his inspiration, he followed up with, “I found was The Eternal Jew, a 1940 German “documentary” that portrayed Jews in a ghetto swarming in tight quarters, beaded caftaned creatures, and then a cut to Jews as mice—or rather rats—swarming in a sewer, with a title card that said ‘Jews are the rats’ or the ‘vermin of mankind.’

In “Eichmann in Jerusalem,” Hannah Arendt analyzes Adolph Eichmann while he is on trial in Jerusalem for the crimes that he committed while being a Lieutenant Colonel in the SS during the Nazi Regime. In the book Arendt talks about how Eichmann’s actions were “banal” in the sense that he seemed to be an ordinary person who just committed acts that were evil. Italian-Jewish Writer Primo Levi, a Holocaust Survivor, states that SS officers like Eichmann lived in their own self-deception that made them believe that their actions were caused by just following their orders in the SS. In this paper, I will analyze the views that both Arendt and Levi had about the Eichmann trial and then compare and state the differences of their views. I will then explain the reasons why both Hannah Arendt’s and Primo Levi’s analysis of Adolph Eichmann that show that the actions that he committed were all truly evil actions.