What struck me the most in this week’s reading was how Kershaw portrays and discusses Hitler’s vision of an ideal Germany. “In reality” Kershaw writes, “Hitler’s ‘social idea’ was simplistic, diffuse, and manipulative” (289). I found it interesting and almost refreshing to view Hitler through this point of view after spending the past weeks reading both Kershaw and Hitler’s words and looking at the complicated and heavily layered circumstances that gave way for Hitler to rise to power. It also seems perfectly fitting that Kershaw sums up Hitler’s ideas as un-original, resting “on the crudest and most brutal version of the nineteenth-century imperialist and social Darwinistic notions” (290). But these brutal and simple-minded ideals perhaps served as some of his most vital stepping blocks for his attainment of power.
Hitler’s tactics do seem rather simplistic once neatly condensed by Kershaw. He starts the reading by addressing “Hitler’s crude scheme to the path of national redemption” (260), which was the same as it was when he first started in politics: “mobilization of the masses, takeover of the state, destruction of internal enemies, preparation of external conquest” (260). The theme of unity was his ultimate tool to achieving a state of unquestioned leadership within the NSDAP. Kershaw even writes “The patent inability to reach any basis in the volkisch movement…made increasing numbers now susceptible to such sentiments” (263). The stress of unity within the party naturally gave way to the notion of “blind obedience and loyalty from the followers” (289). Kershaw writes that there was a “longing for authority…(that) was widespread in those who found appeal in the early Nazi movement” (295). This population of Germany, no matter how small it was at the time, “yearned for national unity” (295) which was conveyed through the growing divisions in the Weimar Republic that Hitler, being the opportunist predator he was, exploited greatly for the furthering of the NSDAP and his own Fuhrer cult.
I also found Hitler’s obsession with “living-space and land policy” (288) to be the epitome of his simplified and barbaric solutions to complex societal issues. Hitler felt that his country’s future “could be secured solely by acquiring land, by eastern colonization as in the Middle Ages…in Europe” (275). Hitler naively took Germany’s economic problems during the 1920’s and claimed that the best solution to these problems was “colonization of the east” (288), but what is worse is the violent nature of his ideas and how he stressed conquest “’by the sword’ as in the Middle Ages” (288). It is sad that just a few years after the horror and brutality Germany suffered during the first world war, Hitler was publicly harping on a seemingly non-existent issue that Germany’s population was lacking space and the only answer to this ‘issue’ was “by attaining power, (and) then by force” (288).
To me, the fact that Hitler's political ideologies were simple, reiterates to me a couple of things. First, it confirms that Hitler was never a natural born leader. He was a man at the right place at the right time. Did he believe what he preached? Yes. Did he preach it well? Sure. That doesn't make him a politico in any sense of the word. Also, it tells me that his simple ideas were just plain easy to stand behind. His "living-space" platform might be the most simplistic yet appealing example. People understand living space. They have homes. Who doesn't want a bigger house than the one they already have? In this way, Hitler may have been somewhat talented. He knew how to speak to the lowest common denominator.
ReplyDeleteIn this week’s reading, I too was stuck by Kershaw’s explanation of Hitler’s plans as simplistic. However, it shouldn’t have come as a surprise that Hitler had a grandiose idea with little backing and little thought put into it. As we have learned, from Hitler’s art school dreams, to his plans to win the lottery, to his ostentatious idea to redesign Vienna, Hitler is much more of an idealist than an actual doer. It also should come as no surprise that Hitler’s ideas were unoriginal and not thought out, as he was not the most educated. I recall the section of “Mein Kampf “ which talks about Hitler’s “social Darwinistic notions” and thinking to myself that this notion, along with the rest of his book, was barely cohesive or made sense.
ReplyDeleteEach week, it surprises me to see a man like Hitler to come into power. Each week, we learn about a character flaw or an idealistic flaw that should have made Hitler a very unlikely leader; his social awkwardness, his lack of ambition, his lack of education, and now this weeks, his lack of original ideas or planning. However, this really highlights the state of desperation and unrest that Germany was in at the time, as Hitler really couldn’t have come into power at any other time or country.
I find Hitler's modus operandi is backwards and archaic. Its relies on the most basic forms of social interaction - the Cult. This attributes to its effectiveness and perceived simplicity. Though I agree that The "Hitler Cult" and the Nazi movement are simplistic and limited, thy do not deliberately intend to be simplifications of more complex ideas.
ReplyDeleteInstead of processing some complex philosophy or scheme through a sieve, and extracting its most palpable elements, the Hitler Cult is simple from the ground up. It resembles the most basic social groups; the Cult. The Nazi movement had its totemic symbols (the Fuhrer, swastika) and was exclusive. It also focused solely on the survival of its own kind, the destruction of 'others', and expansion.
Because it is so basic, the philosophy of the is neither lacking in completeness nor obstructed by unnecessary or confusing outside elements. Because it touches on primal instincts instead of modern rationality, Nazism is more of the heart than of the head. Adherents of Nazism turned to the comfortable Cult at a time of modern turmoil.
I found in Mein Kampf, Hitler's ideas were not only simplistic but intentionally vague, leaving significant room for interpretation. As Sean points out, the simple ideology of unification prevails in the text. Hitler's drive to colonize the east is seemingly simple. The plan literally speaks for itself; colonize the east to unify Germans. I can see why many Germans fell through loopholes in similar plans. While thinking their support was preserving nationalism and unification, Germans were 'blind' to Hitler's cruel intentions. With the support Hitler kept his word and executes his plans. However, in his own terms and ideology of German 'unification'.
ReplyDelete