How Far Do You Agree with the View That in the Years 1933-39, Hitler Was a 'Weak Dictator'

851 WordsMar 5, 20134 Pages
How far do you agree with the view that in the years 1933-39, Hitler was a 'weak dictator'? Hitler has been categorised as a weak and a strong dictator by structuralist and intentionalist historians respectively, intentionalist for the importance of Hitler, and structuralist for the importance of those around him. Timothy Mason, a British Marxist historian, is an example of a structuralist historian, believing that Hitler was heavily reliant on those around and supporting him. There is also Ian Kershaw, who believed in the ‘Working towards the Fuhrer’ ideology, where Hitler exploited the attitudes of the German people in an attempt to have them work towards him. Timothy Mason, a British Marxist historian was certainly believed that…show more content…
This would mean that Hitler was not necessarily important in the running of everyday politics, such as a normal dictator, but he would however let people interpret his policies how they wish. This would not lead to a weak or strong dictator theory, but a society where everyone was working towards the Fuhrer’s will. Werner says how, “…everyone worth a post in the new Germany has worked best when he has, so to speak, working towards the Fuhrer.” This means that everyone in the country no matter what Hitler did was working towards his will, as it is believed he is the only one who knew what Germans truly wanted. In conclusion, Hitler was seen to be a weak dictator, as he was very afraid from the real threat created by losing his popularity, which would have turned the people against him, and whilst he had still not consolidated power fully, particularly at the start of the period, he was always under the threat of being thrown out of power again. Because of this, he had to curb some of his will and policies, and any threat to his popularity was handed over to someone else, whose loss in popularity would not have affected Hitler’s personal
Open Document