How Hitler Maintained Power Between 1933 And 1945

especially noted when he earned the First Class Iron Cross, the highest military honor a German

Hitler’s assumption of power on the 30th of January 1933 was seemingly due to the mass popularity of the Nazi party. However it was far off achieving the 50% majority it needed to put Hitler automatically in power. As well as popularity, backstairs intrigue and the short-sightedness of those in power enabled Hitler to become Chancellor. The weaknesses of Germany’s political leadership were fundamental to Hitler’s success. In some senses the popularity of the party only provided an opening, available for exploitation.

Many people may question, if Germany was a Democratic country, how did Adolf Hitler, a tyrant who orchestrated the largest genocide in human history, rise to power? After World War I in 1918, Germany had lost the war and its imperial government began to downfall. Germany had to undertake full responsibility for the war and pay reparations debilitating its already weakened economy. By many Nationalist and veterans, the forfeiture of the war was seen as a humiliation and degradation as they believed the war could have been won if it wasn’t for protestors and politicians. Hitler, being a German soldier, became obsessed with these views. His narrow-mindedness and misapprehensions, along with many other anti- Semites, led him to pin the fault on Jews. These conspiracy theories were born out of distress, resentment, and racism, not realities (2).

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.

The Nazi regime was "Hitler's regime, it was Hitler's policy, Hitler's rule of force, Hitler's victory and defeat - nothing else" Hans Frank, Hitler's lawyer. If the regime was to be Hitler's and no one else's then he would need complete control over every aspect of German life, from schools, churches, courts, and people. This essay will examine each of the aspects of every day life, what the nazi's did to take control of it and how successful they were.

The debate as to whether Hitler was a ‘weak dictator’ or ‘Master of the Third Reich’ is one that has been contested by historians of Nazi Germany for many years and lies at the centre of the Intentionalist – Structuralist debate. On the one hand, historians such as Bullock, Bracher, Jackel and Hildebrand regard Hitler’s personality, ideology and will as the central locomotive in the Third Reich. Others, such as Broszat, Mason and Mommsen argue that the regime evolved out from pressures and circumstances rather than from Hitler’s intentions. They emphasise the institutional anarchy of the regime as being the result of Hitler’s ‘weak’ leadership. The most convincing standpoint is the

Hitler and Mussolini both came in to power in the early days when their countries, Germany and Italy were facing problems after the Great War. Even then, both Hitler and Mussolini successfully gain and maintain power and control the country.

Issued on March 24th, 1933, and officially named the “Law for Removing the Distress of the People and the Reich”, the Enabling Act essentially meant the end of democracy in Germany, establishing the legal dictatorship of Hitler, by giving him “the power to make laws without the approval of either the Reichstag or the President” . But why would the Reichstag vote for a dictator, and in effect, vote themselves out of existence? In order to ensure that the Reichstag voted in favor of the Enabling Act, Hitler used the method of intimidation and terror to coerce them – when the members of the Reichstag met in the Kroll Opera House to vote, “the [armed] SA and SS men lined up at the exits” 4 menacingly.

Have you ever wondered how Hitler came to power? Have you ever wondered why people would join Hitler? Hitler’s leadership was successful because he started out as a Gefreiter, or Lance Corporal, in the Bavarian army during World War 1. In this piece, I will talk about Hitler’s rise up to take over Germany, how he expanded his reign out further to other countries, and how Hitler

Another one of Flenly's main point is that the effects of the First World War had left a vacuum in the German politics, one which required a strong leading figure. The emotional appeal of the Nazis was very strong, the Nazi ideology fitted with the traditional values like the role of men and women and family values. Only a small group of people would deny these ideas. The Nazis offered exactly what the people wanted and they extended conventional ideals and gave the people a leader which they longed for. Their “long tradition of obedience to authority and the retarded development of political and civil freedom” was a sign that was also spotted by William Shirer as he claimed “Acceptance of autocracy, of blind obedience to the petty tyrants who ruled as princes, became ingrained in the German mind.”[6] hence the immense support shown in the election results, in November election 1933, they gained 92.9% of the overall votes. This was “an achievement which cannot be credited solely to terrorism, still less to fraud.[7]” Flenly’s interpretation also points out that the people gave their approval

Throughout the years 1933-1939, the Nazis consolidated and strengthened their power over the German people in a number of ways. The debate as to whether they depended on their broad popularity or on terror has been argued by historians ever since. The view given by Gellately in Source 4 strongly agrees with that in the question, whereas Evans, in Source 5 combines the terror and popularity aspects of the regime and says that the German people perceived terror as being popular. Johnson presents the view that the selective nature of Nazi terror created a sense of security for German citizens who should have nothing to worry about. However, on any level it

When considering historians accounts on whether Hitler was a “Weak dictator.” due to his erratic ineptitude as a leader or whether he was actually “The Master of the Third Reich.”, it’s essential to look upon the historians argument and whether it’s credible or not. With a look at the differing historian’s views it’s evident that there’s clear difference between the historians viewpoints; some portray Hitler to be a lazy and reluctant decision maker and was merely “One extreme element of the extensive malevolence that was the Nazi system.” Whereas others argue that Hitler had reached a state of absolutism as he controlled all areas of Nazi government and thus tailored a social Darwinist bureaucracy which was driven to implement his world view” . Both sides of the argument can be divided into two different aspects: Some historians argue from an ‘Intentionalist’ viewpoint where Hitler had total control whereas others would argue from a ‘Structualist’ viewpoint thus suggesting Hitler didn’t have full control due to his poly-cratic style of leadership and there was more than one element of rule within Nazi Germany.

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

When looking into the history of Germany and determining what led to the startling rise in Nazism in Germany and its detrimental effects on the social outcasts in Europe, it can be easy to deduce that the Nazi regime was one where Hitler walked in with his officials and took office by force. The truth is that, while the Nazi party is responsible for the atrocities that occurred before and during WWII, they would have not gotten far if it hadn’t been for the cooperation of the German people themselves. Life in the Third Reich provides proof through voting, youth programs and village life that the Nazi party rose into power with German support.

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.