In this weeks’ reading, I found it interesting the transition in Hitler’s attitude during his early years in the Nazi party. It seems in his early days as a beerhall agitator, that he had no interest in one day leading the party. Instead, he wanted rather to only rally the troops and speak on the Nazi party’s behalf to increase support, “he was paving the way for the great leader whose day might not dawn for many years to come”. In the early days, it seemed Hitler not only didn’t want to lead, but could not lead, as “he needed the greater one behind him, on whose command he could lean”. Kershaw states that Hitler “showed himself quite incapable of exercising his authority”.
During this time, Hitler relied on other key figures in the DAP to “transform the party’s hall protection squad into a paramilitary organization”, these figures including Ernst Rohm and Captain Ehrhardt. These figures were key to ensure the NSDAP were kept in the public eye. It was interesting to read that during this time, any publicity was considered good publicity, as the Nazi party themselves would make up stories about assassination attempts to keep themselves in the public eye.
What is interesting to read about was about the influence Mussolini and the “March on Rome” had on the Nazi party, and Hitler himself. The “March on Rome” suggested the model “of a dynamic and heroic leader marching to the salvation of his strife torn country”. At this time, Hitler was still not a major contender for this role, and did not see himself as such.
It was obvious that Hitler was a great orator, but his days as a politician were yet to come. As Kershaw previously stated, Hitler was caught in the right time for his brand of revolution, as “crisis was Hitler’s oxygen”, and the deteriorating conditions in Germany, the terrible inflation, added fuel to Hitler’s brand of hate propaganda.
I agree with the author of this post that it was interesting to read about how Hitler never saw himself in a position to monitor and control the German people. I believe the reason for Hitler’s love for the tool of propaganda came from his love of the arts. One could possibly argue that Hitler’s rise to power was of the ordinary. Hitler was not destined for this; he happened to stumble upon it. He was a follower and needed direction.
ReplyDeleteI was also somewhat surprised to learn about a Hitler who was not actually a very good leader at all, outside of his skills as an orator and a propagandist. I am interested by Cherie's comment that she believes Hitler's love of propaganda comes from his love of the arts. I think I agree with that, I would also attribute this love to Hitler's specific brand of narcissism.
ReplyDelete