Critique Ulrich Herbert s Good Times Bad Times Essay

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.

With this in mind, Nazi Germany boasted one of the largest public welfare programs in history with the slogan “None shall starve nor freeze”. Every year, high-ranking Nazi’s and citizens would take to the streets to collect charity for the unfortunate, which generated a feeling of comradeship toward those in need.

In this essay, Ulrich Herbert’s article “Good Times, Bad Times: Memories of the Third Reich,” will be discussed. This critique will focus on identifying Herbert’s main argument and how effective he was at executing that argument.

On The 30th of January 1933, President Hindenburg appointed Hitler as Chancellor. In the 18 months succeeding this, Hitler became, essentially, a dictator. This essay will look at what a dictatorship is and how it operates, how the population is brought to a point where they accept a dictatorship, and examine and analyze the vital events that took place in Germany which lead to Hitler assuming dictatorial power: the Reichstag fire, the Emergency Decree, the Enabling Act, the banning of trade unions and other political parties, the Night Of The Long Knives, the death of President Hindenburg, and the German army’s oath of loyalty to Hitler. It will

The vital element in maintaining Hitler’s regime remains one of the most controversial arguments amongst historians. There are many considerable factors. Historians such as Jaques Delarue and Hans Rothfels argue that terror was the main component to sustain control, whilst David Crew and Dick Geary believe it was propaganda that made it possible. However, there are other factors that are supported, for instance, contextual condition was backed by Ralph Flenly and Hans Rothfels and the people’s consent, as A.J.P. Taylor proposes, was the imperative constituent. Most historians have the same problem evaluating as they have different definitions for people’s consent. “Silent opposition” is the term used for the people who passively opposed.

Even though Germany was left in a period of struggle and economic weakness after WW1, Adolf Hitler would take a stand by creating a party that would help refine the structure of the economy. This party, when abbreviated, was called Nazi, would also create harsh laws and unrelentless punishment. Due to the Nazi party’s quick growth, there was an immediate impact on lifestyle and politics for the people of Germany. The long term impact brought forth by the consequences or legacy of the Nazi party included a population decrease and an increase in deaths. To make both of these impacts, Hitler had to overcome many hard challenges.

In Giles MacDonogh’s After the Reich, the author attempts to reshape the way that we view World War II and its subsequent aftermath in history. Once Germany is defeated in 1945, many tend to think that the end of World War II in Europe finally brought peace back to the ravaged continent. However, as MacDonogh is able to convincingly examine and prove, the end of the war was just the beginning of suffering for millions of Germans spread across Europe. In the book, he sets out to offer a comprehensive view of what happened to the German people when the tables had turned, where they now found themselves defeated and under Allied occupation. In the title, he includes “The Brutal History”, and the author is able to detail and display just how

Of course all of these changes that came to make up the Third Reich did not happen overnight. Haffner describes it as a fluid continuance of everyday life that mired any real opposition or reaction to the dreadfulness taking place. The feel of ‘business as usual’ mixed with the

The rise and subsequent take-over of power in Germany by Hitler and the Nazi Party in the early 1930s was the culmination and continuation not of Enlightenment thought from the 18th and 19th century but the logical conclusion of unstable and cultural conditions that pre-existed in Germany. Hitler’s Nazi Party’s clear manipulation of the weak state of the Weimar Republic through its continued failure economically and socially, plus its undermining of popular support through the signing the Treaty of Versailles all lead to the creation of a Nazi dictatorship under the cult of personality of Hitler. This clear take-over of power and subsequent destruction of any

Housden’s book is a solid source. While the other sources that will be used for research are largely secondary documents. This source provides primary source documents that were written concurrent with the ascent of Hitler’s power and the Nazi Party’s prominence in mid-20th century Germany. The assessments of the author also add contemporary insight into the historical matter. What is most interesting about this source is the countless perspectives of different political figures and government officials and their take on Hitler and his ideology.

Hitler’s main argument concentrated on comparing Germany’s present problems with the glory days of Germany. In this amalgamation of pathos and slight logos, Hitler used history to his benefit. Shrewdly, Hitler feasts on his audience’s sentiments, yet, at the same time, is able to connect with them sincerely. By offering up lines such as “The misery of our people is horrible to behold!” and “…the Almighty has withheld his blessing from our people,” Hitler institutes that Germany is not what it once was, However, Hitler does this not to bring the German people more into sorrow and shame, but so that he now has the capability to give his audience a tiny sight of hope – the notion that Germany will one day return to and even exceed its former

Adolf Hitler was fundamental to the Nazi State between 1933 to 1939. From his consolidation of power to the start of World War II, Hitler played a crucial role in nearly every aspect of Nazi Germany: its politics and internal administration, culture, military, and international relations. However, Hitler’s involvement in the German economy was limited and he neglected overseeing the daily governance of the state. Nonetheless, as the absolute dictator of Germany, his programs and policies set a determined course for the Nazi State. Essentially, the will of Hitler became the driving force and the sole embodiment of the Third Reich, as encapsulated by Bullock, ‘No other man played a role in the . . . history of the Third Reich remotely

This essay will discuss continuity and change in Hitler’s Germany from 1933 to 1938. What he does and does not change and why? Changes discussed will be political, economic, social and foreign policy changes. Continuity will discuss the army, big businesses and the churches perspectives. Hitler came into power in 1933 and continued to dictate through until 1938.

German history is seen as a ‘painful issue for thousands of Germans and other Europeans’ . However it has interested many historians over the years into inquiring how and why Hitler came to power and how much of this was to do with the failure of parliamentary democracy in Germany. To fully ascertain to what extent these events have in common and what reasons led to the fall of democracy and rise of the Nazis, each have to be looked at individually. Also it seems beneficial, to be able to evaluate these in the relevant context, to look at the situation in Germany was in prior to 1920.

While the policies of the Nazi’s might have helped their overall appeal to the German people, it is important to understand the manner in which they rose to such power. With the end of World War I and the ultimate German surrender, the nation of Germany was left in an economic crisis and the people in discontent. The overall issue of the environment was not a major