Category: Hitler

Introduction

Appeasement is a term used in political and social spheres when dealing with diplomatic policies. The strategies involved in appeasement undertakings encompass political concessions with regards to an enemy in an attempt to avert potential conflicts. The term is widely used when referring to the foreign policy that defined the interaction between Neville Chamberlain of Britain and Adolf Hitler of German. It is especially used in reference to their engagements between 1937 and 1939. Chamberlain’s policy of appeasement was intentionally intended to avoid war with Germany. The strategy has triggered a series of debates for over seven decades among many scholars. It has attracted the attention of academicians, politicians, and diplomatic personnel.

In their evaluation, historians have adopted varied arguments, which range from condemnation to positive judgment of this strategy. There are those who have condemned Chamberlain for permitting Hitler to grow too strong. However, others have adopted a different perspective, congratulating him on the view that he did not have any other option. In addition, they believe that the policy served Britain’s interests very well. During the time, this diplomatic and political strategy was viewed by many as a positive move, especially with the signing of the Munich pact.

In this paper, the author is going to analyze the book Hitler, Chamberlain, and Appeasement. The book is written by Frank McDonough. A critical review of the text reveals that the strategy may have triggered World War II and the associated holocausts. McDonough reveals that the appeasement altered the course of the war itself. Hitler imagined that through war, he would achieve his ambitions to rule the region and the world. In this book review, this author will analyze how McDonough creates a link between the policy and the war. The book is well written and provides an in-depth assessment of the issues taking place at the time.

Hitler, Chamberlain, and Appeasement: Summary of the Book

As already indicated, the book is written by Franklin McDonough. He makes efforts to critically review the positive and negative aspects of the appeasement policy. He utilizes a post revisionist theory by expounding on the works of other historians in this field. In addition, he counters the arguments made by those condemning this political strategy. In the book, he argues that the policy was good, but its implementation was the problem. For example, McDonough argues that Chamberlain made several errors in his judgments and decisions during the war. Such scenarios are what resulted in the failure of the policy.

McDonough argues that the policy of appeasement collapsed because Hitler was unappeasable. He was reluctant to adjust to the European balance of power that favored Germany. His desire, which may have been unguided, was to overthrow Britain and France. The two were the most powerful European nations at the time. In addition, McDonough argues that Hitler was undeterred. He wanted to engage in war, which he believed will help him achieve what he always desired. As such, the two democracies could do nothing to deter him from engaging in war. As long as Hitler was in power, war could not be prevented. That is the position put across by McDonough in the book.

Almost the entire conservative bench of politicians was in support of this policy. However, there existed a huge rift among those who were in support of the same. For example, the majority of those involved in the foreign policies were in favor of an appeasement strategy to avoid physical confrontations. The partitioning of Czechoslovakia under the influence of the British and France was an implication that they surrendered or gave in to the Nazi threat. The collapse of the peace deal could benefit neither Britain nor France as far as security was concerned. The understanding of this misjudgment gave Hitler an upper hand in consolidating his strategy in war. He appeared to be ahead of the others.

As a political issue during the war, Czechoslovakia did not bother many people involved in the confrontation. However, in September 1938, Britain voiced its objection to the bullying of small democratic states. In response to this, the country played a critical role in the formulation of the Munich pact. The House of Commons cheered Chamberlain as he made for the Munich agreement. He returned with a famous speech dubbed “peace of our time”. The press was impressed with this deal, but Reynolds’s news and Daily Worker, however, were in dissent of the agreement. The labor party objected to the agreement, and they furiously questioned why Chamberlain opted for this agreement. Duff Cooper, a conservative member of parliament, was in favor of war with Hitler at an early stage and opted to resign as a sign of protest against this policy.

The war broke out later, and the policy was blamed for its inability to halt dictators. Some members of parliament associated the policy with wealthy and influential people in the city of London who described them as conservatives lenient to Hitler’s dictatorship. In Winston Churchill’s premiership, the appeasement policy was not condoled, and those who supported it were asked to take responsibility.

A Critical Analysis of the Book

In a thorough analysis of Neville Chamberlain’s appeasement, McDonough embarked on the historical work of various authors like Parker 1994. He expanded on their work by including post revisionist theories and appeasement in the society. In society, McDonough took note of appeasement in various forms, including the mass media, economic, and opponents as well.

In his book, McDonough agrees that appeasement was the only option for Britain’s government in dealing with foreign policies in the 1930s. However, revisionists argued that the policy was not necessary since it compromised the British government by allowing World War II and its holocaust to take effect. To counter this argument, McDonough content that the policy was a crisis management strategy but was poorly implemented as many government officials did not take it seriously. In addition, he asserts that the policy was implemented too late without a strong force that would counter Hitler.

McDonough, in his book, was of the opinion that appeasement must be analyzed as the only policy at the time of operation, “the only usable policy.” For instance, he argues that the Chamberlain’s personality in the execution of the policy provides an important avenue for evaluation. The evaluation is particularly based on the errors of judgment, failure to cooperate with his opponents, and unwillingness to try an alternative way. Failing to assess these options, the events subjected Chamberlain to enter into war with France in early 1939 while in a feeble position. British had missed an advantage of hitting Hitler’s regime, which meant that German had only one stumbling block on its way; Britain, which eventually happened in 1944. In his opinion, McDonough affirms that Chamberlain’s erred judgment contributed to the course of the war itself.

The book brings it out well on how Britain manipulated mass media to avoid public scrutiny of Chamberlain’s appeasement policy and attempted to convey an impression that all was well with overwhelming assistance. Chamberlain’s worst misjudgment was to believe that Hitler was giving in with his appeasement deal but was mistaken since Hitler was not only preparing for war but was also consolidating his strategy.

After World War II, historians, as well as politicians, have expressed chamberlain action in different ways. They assert that Hitler’s options were limited, and the grievances would be sorted out through a peace deal, which would shield the world from potential war. Many scholars, including the Prime Minister (Winston Churchill) who took over from Chamberlain, described the approach as fallacious. In his book, The Gathering Storm, Churchill described Hitler as a dictator whose demands were not limited, and the policy of appeasement offered time to consolidate his strength.

McDonough also reviews the works of A.J.P. Taylor, an English historian that ventured on European diplomacy between the 19^th and 20^th century, and he affirms that Hitler did not possess even a blueprint for war and was just acting like any other German leader would have behaved. McDonough considered the policy as an active one as opposed to passive. Letting Hitler gain strength was a policy initiated by people faced with real problems and doing what they can be based on the circumstance of their time. In response, Taylor asserts that the policy was supposed to be viewed as a rational act towards an unappeasable leader and was worth it at the time both diplomatically and politically as well.

McDonough has criticized historians, especially the revisionists, for dwelling on what motivated chamberlain instead of examining how the policy worked practically as a “usable policy to face Hitler.” He condemns those lashing out to Chamberlain’s policy. “Understanding what Hitler did afterward,” he writes, “the condemnation of men who attempted to restore peace in the 1930s, who knew nothing on the aftermath……..The appeasement makers erred in many ways. Nevertheless, they were not blameless. However, what they tried was logical, rational, and humane.

McDonough argues in his book that Chamberlain’s appeasement policy in some context was a continuation of what had conspired after World War I. Until the failure of the Munich pact that was thought to stop Hitler from invading Czechoslovakia, appeasement was a policy that flourished between 1919 and 1937. The policy was meant to pursue peace on the assertion that the First World War was mistakenly initiated. Many who uphold this assertion were sure that the League of nation would avert it. Others believed that the conflict was caused by large-scale armaments and remedial for this cause was disarmament. Likewise, national grievances were expected to be solved peacefully other than through war.

The historical event of Chamberlain appeasement which led to the World War II has influenced many foreign policies across the world. Politicians have argued that force should have been exerted in advance to avert the eminent security threats. Some leaders have made decisions by comparing some of their counterparts to Hitler. The Munich analogy was a good avenue to stop Hitler militarily prior to 1939 but the untimed and poor implementation led to its adversaries.

The book is well written and has received vast congratulatory messages from historians and politicians on settling the issue of appeasement policy. The book reviews appeasement in the society where the public was kept in the dark on what was going on. The book has also received positive reviews in academic journal as well as in diplomatic avenues. Andrew Thorpre once quoted saying “a cogent and stimulating view of appeasement policy that will elevate the debate even further.”

Conclusion

In summary, the author of this paper has elaborated and expounded on appeasement policy. In the analysis, the author has also noted that the more time chamberlain took to initiate the policy, the more Hitler became stronger. Even though the time of implementation was late as McDonough suggests, the policy would have contributed to conflict between German and Czechoslovakia which was not beneficial to either Britain or France. However, the book does not provide an elaborate strategy in carrying out an appeasement process.

The assessment of the policy was also triggered by the aftermath of the First World War At this time; the appeasement policy was the only way to prevent another world war. However, the manner in which the policy was handled has discouraged another appeasement policy from being implemented. For instance, the politicians and world leaders are running away from this policy and any Hitler like characters are handled with speed. For example, the Saddam Hussein issues is not different form Hitler and actions to counter his threat was hurriedly initiated.

Bibliography

Faber, David. Munich, 1938: Appeasement and World War II. New York: Sage Publishers, 2009.

McDonough, Frank. Hitler, Chamberlain and Appeasement. London: Cambridge University Press, 2001.

McDonough, Frank. Neville, Chamberlain, Appeasement, and the British Road to War. London: Manchester University Press, 1998.

Weinberg, Gerhard. The Foreign Policy of Hitler’s Germany Starting World War II. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1980.

Introduction

People have been observed to associate evil with extraordinary in a gruesome manner. According to Arendt, this belief is a product of the influence of the media, the occurrences n history and an individual’s own understanding that malevolence is isolated and easily identifiable since it is not a usual occurrence, or ordinary. Arendt observed this as an individual’s way of setting himself apart from people who have committed such crimes in the past, displaying brutality through their heinous acts (Arendt 12).

Despite this observation, Arendt showed the predictability of evil as depicted by the role played by Eichmann among the Nazi. Eichmann was a family man who lived a common life, though his personality drove him to the desire for success that eventually leads to crimes that cost him his life.

The author portrays Eichmann as a person who did no wrong, according to himself, simply because he was following orders. This is a scenario that has occurred with the Nazi, under the command of Adolf Hitler, and the story of Jim Jones, and the people who followed him in a quest to build an ideal society (Arendt 23).

Social psychology

There have been various acts of mass killing in America, due to charisma and the influence of leaders. Charles Manson influenced a group of ten people to commit murder in Southern California, in 1969. Charles was able to attain this since he had convinced his followers that he was Christ incarnate, and defended his actions by saying that he was just a reflection of the ills in society. Another incidence saw a member of the US House of Representatives and his entourage killed, on the order of Jim Jones, in Jonestown.

Jim Jones later requested his over 900 followers to conduct the greatest mass suicide in history, by drinking cyanide-laced kool-aid. This suicide was observed to be voluntary, so that the many women, men and children would be with their leader, whom they adored. The situation was magnified as observed with the situation of Adolf Hitler, whose vision was followed by an entire nation. The influence of Hitler led to a great war, and many cruel acts (Moore, Shular and Carter).

Through studies conducted on the influence exhibited by leaders such as Charles, Jones and Hitler on their followers, it was observed that their persuasion was beyond normal logic. The followers were observed to be entirely committed to the commands of their leaders, and were even willing to kill themselves and others, on request by their leaders.

The public on the other hand viewed such leaders as unusual figures, who were unattractive due to their violent nature, and provided their followers with paranoid delusions that were destructive of unity and peace. These movements provided difficulties in observing the relationship between leaders and their followers, with respect to social theory (Moore, Shular and Carter).

Power of a group

Student riots are one of the common examples of the power exhibited when people are in groups. The same can be attributed to the followers of Jones and Hitler, regarding their violent nature and brutality. People in groups have been observed to experience excitement when involved in things that are unlawful or restricted. Reasonable people are easily transformed into followers of their leaders, who are then seen as avatars of God on earth.

This explains how easily people can be influenced into changing their beliefs and adopting totally differing concepts from what they are used to, even if it is momentary. The transformation that people go through in adopting new ideologies can also be observed as identities picked up so that they can alienate themselves from the normal lifestyle, with all the challenges that they face on a regular basis.

The involvement of people in activities that demand self sacrifice was attributed to the commitment obtained from compelling leadership and persuasive groups that lead people into social transformation and revolution.

Power of propaganda

Propaganda takes on a political aspect, and uses mediums such as radio broadcasts, posters, and leaflets, among others. The objective of the propagandist is to change the expectations and actions of the people by changing their understanding of a situation or an issue, so that it coincides with that of the propagandist (Irving, 1999). One way to looks at propaganda is the provision of selective information, so that people are provided with only one point of view.

The delivery of such information also seeks to prevent the people from being confronted with varying information. The opinion of the people is therefore dependent on confusion and deception, as opposed to understanding and persuasion. As in the case of Adolf Hitler, who used propaganda as a weapon for war.

He created a false image and therefore channelled the people’s hatred towards an enemy, by making them believe that an injustice had been dome against them. The ministry for public enlightenment and propaganda was the one responsible for most of the propaganda in Germany (Irving, 1999).

Leadership by example

Jones had been observed from an early age as a person who got along with the stigmatized people, including the fat, ugly old ladies, the unloved and the downtrodden. He struggled for the welfare of his followers, ensuring that they had a home and food to eat, without caring for his material needs. Jim Jones and his followers exhibited ecstatic communal selflessness. Jim Jones was observed to be a paranoid leader, who led his people to a catastrophic blood bath in the temple.

About 1,000 people killed themselves by consuming a poison, including the armed guards who surrounded Jonestown. Jones and his closest disciple Moore shot themselves in a double suicide. Some converts who were not at Jonestown were also reported to have killed themselves later, while those who remained alive expressed remorse for not dying with their friends (Galanter 166).

The group comprised about five thousand followers. Jones was able to gain political influence by asking his followers to write letters in order to show that he had a wide support base. This way, many politicians consulted with him, and he was able to obtain a seat as a commissioner in San Francisco. This implies that the temple was not secluded from the world, but rather took an active role to change the system from within.

The people’s temple comprised of mostly the black community, which was a significant difference between them and other organizations. He was able to attract the oppressed blacks since people at the temple worked together in harmony without any prejudice. About 80% of his followers were black, where 70% were women. These people were mainly poor, had previously abused drugs or were incarcerated (Galanter 167).

Influencing the masses

Allied propaganda was observed as the main cause of the revolts and morale collapse, in the navy and home front in Germany, during the First World War. Propaganda was therefore seen to be a tool of great importance by the Nazis. Before any news was disseminated, the journalists and broadcasters had to get it approved first, and it had to reflect the thoughts of Hitler on the subject. The belief of the Nazis was further spread by production and distribution of numerous films and posters.

Among the people who were influenced by Adolf included people in high ranks, who allowed the dissemination of false information. Before the Second World War, the propaganda disseminated by the Nazis was aimed at a few particular people. The struggle of Germany and the Nazi party against both internal and external enemies, including the Jews was continually reminded to the Germans (Irving, 1999).

Jones also learned how to manipulate people based on the words that one chose. This way he was able to manipulate the people, and get them to trust him. When Jones was young, he expressed his anger through cursing, and he would be paid for it. This was effective as Jones had knowledge of the emotional effect of language, and the involvement of masses of people in prohibited acts.

When introduced to the church, he found that he had the ability to preach and speak in tongues, which helped him gain the approval of people, who saw him as a possible child evangelist. His teachings were mainly focused on sexual practises, where he convinced the people to accuse themselves of evil doing. Such evils included sexual misconduct and selfishness (Galanter 168).

The acts of verbal brutality against one another led to physical violence, since the meetings were aimed at undermining the trust of others while reinforcing the dominance of the group over the individual. The people were crowded in a single hot room, with no food or during, confronting each other.

The centrality of Jones was seen through his interventions, when he reminded the people of his selflessness and sacrifices for the success of the group and the temple. The elite and followers were constantly reminded of the Jim Jones’s true and only love that could not be reciprocated, because it was absolute (Galanter 170).

Temple members saluted each other using the phrase Jim loves you’. In doing so, it was instilled among the members that only Jones’s love was pure and unselfish. Jones ensured that all the expressions of love were directed at him, and that the group isolate themselves from outsiders, or members of the public.

Jones encouraged the followers to break apart from their family bonds, and give themselves wholly to the church, since only he, Jones, would help them. In order to achieve this, family work was diffused, with child raising responsibilities being shared among the members. Jones also encouraged his followers to adopt interracial children, in order to break down racial barriers.

Getting the people’s trust through selective delivery of information

With no family ties and everyone referring to Jones as the only person who was right, the people were able to relax. Children were taught to act based on what Jones would do, or how he would approach a particular situation. Jones ensured that the followers were committed to him and the community only by pairing the men and women who were not attracted to each other. He also broke up partners who were fond of each other to avoid any destruction to the purpose and goals of the community (Weinstein 54).

Goebbels and Hitler made people think just what they wanted them to, by ensuring that what they thought, did or said was regarded as safe. The propaganda spread by the Nazi regime showed little resistance from within, and people seemed to show enthusiasm for the rule of Adolf, due to fear. Research conducted on the success of the Nazi propaganda showed that it did attain its intended purpose, which was a rise of the Nazi party by influencing the thoughts of the masses.

The success of the propaganda was highly dependent on the maintenance of an ideal, insightful and convincing image. The first step for Hitler was to establish himself and gain the affection of the people. After attaining this, his standing was appreciated by the people, in spite of the disreputable revelations (Langer, 1972).

Hitler was tactical in spreading of propaganda. He believed that every aspect of the lives of the people should be infiltrated. In order to achieve this, he made sure that people did not know anything else besides the propaganda that they prepared, by having total control of all the media. The most influential propaganda machine was the cinema.

He used it to portray a powerful German nation, with massive marches and gatherings, and incorporated addresses by Hitler, which were not always accurate, though beneficial in motivating the people and strengthening the Nazi influence. The number of people in cinema attendance increased a lot, with the numbers reaching about 250 million in 1933, and one billion ten years later. These movies were Nazi influenced, in order to showcase their might, and in doing so promote the Nazi party (Langer, 1972).

The Germans in other countries like the Baltic States, the Soviet Union, Poland and Czechoslovakia were constantly reminded of their blood ties to Germany, which were much more powerful than their loyalty to their new countries.

The Nazis also informed the people of their potential enemies like Britain and France that it was their governments that were pushing for a war with the Germans, and that the Germans had no cause for trouble. Another piece of information disseminated by the Nazis to all people was of the magnitude of their military achievements, as well as their scientific and cultural triumphs (Irving, 1999).

Charismatic appeal of the leaders

Jones encouraged his followers to abstain from sex, while he himself remained active, and demanded that the women declare their sexual satisfaction only from Jones, and not from their partners.

The men were also asked to confess their attraction to him. This was seen as a tactical move to mend his image, since he had been arrested for homosexual solicitation at a cinema theatre. The couples were discouraged from bearing children, and only Jones was permitted to do so. There was a lot of conflict due to Jones’s homosexuality, and also since he sodomized men who refused to confess their attraction to him.

The effectiveness of the influenced films was massive. The introduction of colour films made the visual aspects better, and microphones made sure that the message got through to everyone. The films depicted a strong Nazi army, and scenes in the movies showed the brutality of the British soldiers, separating people from their families and raping the people.

The result for this was strengthened support for Hitler and his mission. There were bigger crowds attending to hear speeches made by Hitler, and the speeches were recorded and broadcasted, so that even more people would get to hear his words.

This persuasion tactic was highly effective in getting the Germans to rally behind the Nazis, and blocking the people from the truth gave them only one side of the story, which they believed to be true. By 1940, about 16 million Germans had access to a radio, which were enough foes Hitler to influence them (Langer, 1972).

The radio was found in both the homes and the workplace, and therefore no message would get past the people. When the Fuhrer made an address while people were working, they had to stop and listen, and this was essential in developing closeness between the people and the Fuhrer.

To reduce monotony, Goebbels sharp mind decided to introduce the broadcasting of entertainment, so that people would remain tuned in, and whenever Hitler needed to address the masses, the entertainment would just be disrupted. This way, people would always be tuned in. Hitler was able to gain the complete trust of the Nazis and the people, which was beneficial in order to lead them to war (Irving, 1999).

During the spread of this propaganda, February 1943, people were not aware of the Holocaust. The strategy used by Germany was aimed at alienating the British and the Americans, and assuming the role of defender of the western European culture. The Nazi propaganda machine was viewed as terrifying, unusual and impressive, alternatively. Goebbels has been seen as the mastermind behind Hitler’s success in persuading the masses, after his immense understanding of human psychology, and the need to be entertained (Langer, 1972).

The inner cadre for Jones lived in fear of his mood swings that resulted in emotional displays of violence. Jones explained his episodes as a result of insulin deficiencies, and demanded that guards be with him at all times so that he would not harm his PC members. He displayed great understanding of his members by the attentiveness with which he listened to their problems and addresses them. He convinced people that he had a magnetic stare, and so he wore glasses to protect his members.

He had great vitality, which enabled him to spend many nights without sleep, or do laborious tasks for long periods of time. This was beneficial to him, as people associated his strength to spiritual energy. His energy was attributed to his addiction to amphetamines (Weinstein 67).

Jim Jones was able to communicate with his followers in great depth, which made people see him as possessing paranormal abilities, and they testified through his actions. He was able to spread his propaganda through sermons. They were structured with great choreography, as Jones understood the need to create an appropriate mood for the desired effect.

In his initial sermons, he emphasized on how ordinary he was, in order to gain the trust of the people, but as the congregation grew, he separated himself from them, and began to depict himself as mighty, which is what the people wanted, as they saw him as God. Jones’s preaching was described by Wightman as below (Weinstein 79).

“He gave earthy commentaries that made the audience howl. With a clever sense of humour, he tossed off all pretensions of piety, adopting the language, intonations and vocabulary of his inner city people….Jones spoke with candour, giving off the sexual magnetism of a crooner”

His messages were specific, and his ability to study the crowd and respond quickly to their liking was also beneficial in showing the unity between him and the people. The believers worshipped him. Jim Jones encouraged his followers to find the God within themselves and fulfil his wishes. In doing so, Jones ensured that the God within the people would be in his own image, therefore influencing the people.

Conclusion

Goebbels was the man behind the success of Hitler in leading the Germans. The radio was highly effective due to the large population. The newspapers were not ideal since they could not reach every person overnight, though regional newspapers were common, and Goebbels still influenced their content. The extremities of the context of the propaganda generated some rebellion due to credibility of the message delivered.

This in itself did not have much effect in distrusting Hitler, since his success as a leader was mainly due to the effect of his vision, which was to become a super power, and the people associated with this. The propaganda spread by Goebbels had a big role in influencing the Germans to rally behind Hitler and the Nazis, since they believed that Hitler’s goal was to advance and change their nation for the greater good (Irving, 1999).

Jonestown temple members grew fast, and Jones found it challenging to interact with the people individually, and this led to defections. The temple was aimed at providing the people with a sense of empowerment, enabling them to accomplish tasks by believing in themselves, and those who left felt that they had achieved self-worth.

Jones and the temple were against people growing beyond them, since he had devoted his life to making himself the sole provider of the people who were dependent on him and no one was allowed to leave the family. In his quest to maintain control, some people began to reconsider their standing in the temple, and Jones therefore sent people to build a place for refuge in the jungle (Weinstein 101).

While in Johnstown, he executed some procedures that did not please the masses and this led to more resentment and defections. His fascination for death was seen in his claims that he was ready to die, but did not, since his people needed him.

The mass suicide was an act of defiance to conform to the needs of society, after some temple members requested to leave. Jones started a war that made his people think that they were under attack, leading to their mass suicide, to prove their defiance to the way of the world, which included corruption. Since the congressman was a threat to their united community, they killed him, and his party. Knowing that they would be attacked, they opted to kill themselves than live without their community (Weinstein 132).

Works Cited

Arendt, Hannah. Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil. Westminster, London: Penguin Classics, 1994. Print.

Galanter, Mark, et al. “The Moonies: A Psychological Study of Conversion and Membership in a Contemporary Religious Sect.” American Journal of Psychiatry (1979): 136, 165-170. Print.

Irving, David. Goebbels. Mastermind of the Third Reich. London: Focal Point Publications, 1999. Print.

Jonestown: The Life and Death of People’s Temple. Dir. Stanley Nelson. Perf. Rebecca Moore, Janet Shular and Tim Carter. 2006.

Langer, Walter. C. The Mind of Adolf Hitler: The Secret Wartime Report. New York: Basic Books, 1972. Print.

Weinstein, Fred. The Dynamics of Nazism: Leadership, Ideology and the Holocaust. New York: Academic Press, 1980. Print.

Introduction

This research paper critically analyses the life of Hitler as the president of Germany and the extent he went to conquer the whole world which he sought to do. It considers step by step on his rise to power and how he started war, how he advanced and his defeat. It also touches on his ideas and how he advocated for Jew’s free society that is in Germany. His successes and failures which made him to loose the war has also been covered.

Early Life of Adolf Hitler

Adolf Hitler was born on 20^th April 1889 in Austria near the German boarder. He was a German politician and also the leader of National Socialist German Workers. He did well in school and this made his parents to see a bright future before him. His leadership qualities in school made him popular to his classmates. His consideration to become a monk was as a result of his religious beliefs which he acquired from his childhood.

He liked to dominate over other pupils and giving orders and this made him to loose his popularity. His dream for becoming an artist was the centre of his conflict with his father who wanted Hitler to become a civil servant (Bischof 1993).

He attended Catholic school. His father died when he was young and he survived by orphan’s pension and his mothers support, that was in Vienna. By pursuing his Fine arts in Vienna he was rejected because of his inability to paint and they directed him to the field of architecture. But this to him appeared impossible because for one to join the Architecture school one had to have attended the building school and also a high school degree was required.

After his mother’s demise in December 21^st 1907, His life was in struggle to an extent of being a painter in Vienna for survival. Later he ran out of money and the academy of Arts rejected him to pursue artistic work.

Chancellor Hitler

Hitler became legally the Chancellor of Germany after being appointed by president Pawl Von Hindenburg in 1933. He headed the coalition government but later made the Hindenburg figurehead and consequently doing away with his non-Nazi partners. The Nazi regime was able to make Germany to prosper again and reduced mass unemployment. Still there was more spending which was directed to military and all labor unions and strikes were suppressed. This prosperity made Nazi more popular and no opposition was evident or no one dared to challenge Nazi rule. All liberal socialist and communists were put into exile by deployed police who were sent by the government of the time.

Hitler as a chancellor made sure that the government powers were centralized to him self and the state governments were demolished and Reich governors was put into place. Reich governors appointed city and towns representatives and in this exercise of appointing mayors Hitler had to approve.

All civil organizations and branches of the government were controlled by the party except the protestant and catholic churches. Hitler was so popular to an extent of being idolized by Nazi state and they called him Fuhrer (leader). When it came to interests and decision making, Hitler was not that broad and the two would overlap (Shaaron & Victoria, 1998).

All the demands of Hitler resulted to war any time they were not honored. This was a strategy he used and after the gain he would move to the next goal. This strategy worked well after Germany resigned from League of Nations and reflected the treaty and did all what the treaty was against.

Hitler made alliance with Benito Mussouni and he sent military aid to Spanish civil war. During this period Germany took over most of Europe and it’s after invasion of Poland that made Britain and France to declare war. This was the core reason that made the start of Second World War.

Hitler’s Political View

He denied the parliamentary democracy and advocated for self determination of the nation. He believed that a nation would manifest itself clearly when Minas are brought fourth together. He never believed that the leaders who are elected through ballot boxes can be representative of the people. He argued that development of leadership cannot be constructed within a short time but would take years or even decades.

He believed that Internationalism cannot bear real values of human cultures and believed that those who became international are those without creative ability like Jews, those had self reservation but individually they had no cultural abilities.

He regarded Jews as old enemies and he believed they hated Germans as Germans hated them. This idea made him to view Jews as the one would make him not to win the war hence he advocated for wiping off all Jews in Europe.

He was up to destroy Marxism and believed that his prosperity would be determined by the absence of Marxism. He also believed that without him war against Marxism would still continue, that was the core reason he regarded Marxism as the enemy of the people.

According to Hitler communism was brought by social democracy and it is through communism that would bring death and destruction of the nation and he vowed to fight democracy to death.

Weimar Republic

It was after the first world war that Germany lost and its monarchy came to a standstill and it proclaimed for a republic. After the constitution was put into place the president had political and military power and also there was presence of democracy. It was during this time that national election was held to elect representatives of national assembly. During this time Germany government accepted the Versailles Treaty which came up with terms that made Germany to pay the damages caused in the First World War (Weinberg, 2006). This also made Germany to loose some of its territory and colonies. Germany felt humiliated by the terms and Hitler believed that though humiliations still Germany had a very great destiny towards its greatness.

Weimar Republic was defined by government from Bavaria and through this Hitler declared to get rid of communists and the Jews. The Nazi party got up with the attention in their attempt to take Bavarian government and through this struggle to seize power in Munich made Hitler to be arrested and charged with treason.

Hitler in World War 1

Hitler was brave and this enabled him to serve in France and Belgium army and received honors which were very rare. Even after all those honors he was never promoted because his regimental staffs believed that he lacked leadership skills. Hitler got an injury in the war during some battle (Shaaron & Victoria, 1998). He was admitted in the hospital after being affected by a mustard gas attack and he became temporarily blind. It is during this experience that the issue of saving Germany became evident in his mind. By protecting Germany he believed that Europe’s Jews were to be destroyed but he did not have the slightest knowledge on how to do it.

During wars, Hitler admired Germany so much and later became a citizen and a patriot and believed that the war to his life was one of the greatest experience he ever had in life. Germany was deprived many advantages by a Versailles Treaty which also affected its economy. It was through the Treaty that Poland was recreated and the treaty also laid the blame of honors wars to Germany (Bischof 1993). But Germany considers the treaty as humiliation because its armed forces were to be limited according to the treaty. The numbers of battleships was only supposed not to be more than six, no sub-marines was allowed, no air force, and even the number of army was to be not more than 100,000.

Hitler and Nazi

Hitler after the treaty got a good reason to build up Germany they took the treaty as a good condition that is political and social to seek for power. Hitler remained in the army even after 1^st world war and returned to Munich. He was later appointed as the police spy of intelligence commando to influence soldiers to enter the German Workers’ Party (GAP). Hitler joined the party and was really impressed by the party’s idea which favored anti-Semitic and active government with non-Jews. Hitler’s oratory skill was the core reason why he was invited to this party. And he got the privilege of being in the executive committee and one of the founding members. The party had to change its name to National Socialist German Work’s Party (NSDAP) so as to increase its appeal.

Hitler participated fully in the party after he was discharged from army in 1920. Later he became a good speaker in large crowds. Through his speaking skills he directed his speeches towards his rival politicians who perceived the idea of non-socialism and more so against Marxism and Jews. NSDAP advocated for removal of Jews from the society because they believed that the Jews were responsible domestic problems which were found in Germany.

Their goal was to completely remove the Jews. It is through this that Hitler and nationalist groups wanted to overthrow the Bavarian government (Shaaron & Victoria, 1998). Hitler was arrested, tried and sentenced to five years but he was only released after nine months. This made him to be transformed and became more tactful in politics. He also learned that it was not a matter of force alone which could lead him up to the political ladder and also through undermining the Weimar constitution, mass movement and intimidation.

The ban on Nazi Party was lifted and was allowed to speak in public. In 1928 elections, Nazi was unpopular and won very few seats but later in 1930 Nazi vote increased astronomically. The industrial magnates supported NSDAP financially and they were reassured by Hitler’s success and they trusted the party. Hitler later acquired citizenship and ran for presidency. He won the election four times more than communist candidates. It is after Hitler became president that he enjoyed domestic and international successes and abandoned the treaty and started building a large army (Weinberg, 1994).. For him to hold grip in the army he dismissed the senior general and took a central command of armed forces to implement his ideologies.

Hitler’s Battle Journey to Ussr

The Second World War was dominated by German Blitzkrieg tactics. They attacked airfields, communication military installations. Poland was overrun within one month, Denmark and Norway were defeated in less than two months. Later Holland, Belgium, Luxemburg and France were overthrown in six weeks. Britain itself stood firm but by June 1940 France was defeated.

Hitler’s first setback came when he tried to prevent Luftwaffe from control of English aerial security channel. This made him to turn to North Africans and Balkans where Italy was defeated; his army was able to defeat Greece, Yugoslavia, and the Crete Island and was also able to drive away the British from Cyrenaica.

The decision to invade Soviet Russia was as a result of his belief that this would prevent Britain from succeeding in continuing the war. He believed that after he took his step in Russia it would be a war of destruction of Jews in Europe. This according to Hitler would take the communist rule into the grave.

According to Shaaron & Victoria (1998), the war reached to the United States and due to USA support of Britain, Hitler declared total war to Germany’s enemies who stood behind British-American-Soviet alliance. British refused German control of Europe, this drove Hitler to implement ‘the solution of Jewish question’ which he believed to annihilate the Jews under German rule. Hence the invasion of Russia was to conquer the East so that he may have the platform to destroy the Jews and their biological roots.

As Hitler expected Russia did not collapse, he underestimated the depth of military which Russians would deploy and the spirit of fighting in Russian people. In stead he dismissed them as inferior peasants (Weinberg, 1994). He did this by concentrating his attacks in Moscow and moved to seize Ukraine. He did a great mistake to announce that he had taken Russia and they would never rise again. By doing this he disregarded the fact that the winter was on the way and his troops would be condemned by the winter.

Hitler dismissed his key commanders after they sought permission to withdraw from the war, he took full control of the military operation and never took heed to any advice which was contrary to the picture he had in his mind which was to conquer the world.

Hitler as moved to defensive when the US became part of the war. But still he refused to abandon the war or accept defeat even after it was clear that he was loosing the battle. Hitler’s health was affected by drugs he was taking and this made him unable to appear to public frequently and this affected his effectiveness. And this made it apparent that the German defeat was visible. Germany itself did not have enough resources to continue with the struggle (Bischof 1993). The generals after Hitler refused to withdraw, became frustrated and sought to pave way for negotiations but this failed and Hitler had to revenge to those conspirators by executing them. By 1945, the defeat was evident and he believed that if he did had to go down he would go down with the entire Germany.

Hitler noted that the time had reached when no further attack was possible toward Berlin, and afterwards he married Eva Braun in a civil ceremony. Later the next day he was informed that Benito Mussouni who was his close friend and Italian dictator had been assassinated. Hitler was more determined and he avoided to be captured. Soviet troops by now did street to street combat and were very close to where Hitler was and this made Hitler to commit suicide by shooting himself.

Hitler’s Successes

• Hitler was able to assemble talented individuals for his top hierarchy and influenced them towards his ideologies. They were very capable and were German leaders who participated in the 2^nd world war.
• Hitler was able to use bullying successfully to defeat Austria and Czechoslovakia even without executing any fight towards them (Weinberg, 2006).
• He used blitzkrieg techniques rather than conventional French warfare technique to conquer France, Poland and many other European countries.
• Hitler had a great approval from German people because of his charisma even when his party was at its ebb.
• He made German to be temporarily the strongest nation in Europe from scratch. This was as a result of the treaty which restricted Germany from having strong military forces. And he did this by having a navy and air force from scratch.

Hitler’s Failures

• He failed to attack England after Dunkirk. This would have given him an upper hand because he had the vigour of war and had instilled fear among other European nations and this would have also instilled fear toward England and forces like USA could not have offered the support to England.
• He decided to attack Russia before he was through with England. This affected his military power because of the divided military hence weakening his military. This gave England an upper hand and never gave in to Germany.
• Hitler underestimated the power and strength of Russians and he post poned his attack on Russia.
• He did not concentrate all his forces toward Moscow rather he split his attacking military hence his attacks was not able to unleash terror toward Russians in full blast (Weinberg, 2006).
• Hitler did not continue producing arms after the wear began which is always expected but this became as a result of worry towards public domain and their standpoint. He felt that they were making too much sacrifices. On the other hand England continued producing war machines, like planes.
• Hitler never considered Jews in the war rather he was against them, therefore Jewish men had fought bravely for German in First World War, and if he had considered them they would have been of great importance due to their scientific minds which would have contributed towards the war (Weinberg, 1994).
• In other countries like Russia and England they mobilized women into the efforts of replacing men who were not available because of military service. This affected the economy because men were not replaced and this really had adverse effect towards Germany.

Reasons for War

Hitler involved himself into the war which brought about the 2^nd world war for various reasons; some for his personal conquest and as countries conquest.

• They believed that they were humiliated by the treaty which restricted them from having a big armed force, union with countries like Austria was forbidden and also Germans were forced to live in Czechoslovakia and Poland. This made Hitler believe that they never lost in the war and wanted Germany to be great again.
• Germany population was growing quickly and this raised the need to expand its territory and this was only possible to conquer land in Eastern Europe.
• Hitler believed that Aryan race was superior and were to rule over others so he had the right to invade Europe and to make other Germans slaves.
• In Russia it was ruled by communists, which was not the case with Nazis who were fascists and he continuously blamed communists for Germany’s defeat in 1^st world war, hence he wanted to defeat the communists.

Summary

As we have seen from the above research Hitler was an evil man as far as his ideologies were concerned but politically and military he was a genius. We cannot discredit the whole issue of Hitler’s life but we have seen that there are some lessons we can learn from his life. His strategies in war can be shifted in the success of economy by making sure that the success of any country depends upon the individuals who are at the top in hierarchy of making valid decisions. Hitler’s issue of working with German leaders could have excelled if only he took heed to their guidance. There is no man who is indispensable (Weinberg, 2006).

But every person in the society has his part to play for example the Jews had advanced in science and Hitler could have taken advantage of Jews innovation to win the Second World War. But his failures are really appreciated otherwise the whole world would be under dictatorship as he had planned. In essence Hitler’s decision to conquer the whole world was a fantasy because of limited resources Germany had, and this derives that war brings more destruction than negotiation. If he had done this through out consultation, no shedding of blood could have happened and we would be laying tribute on Hitler.

Reference List

Bischof, G. (1993). “The Historical Roots of a Special Relationship: Austro-German Relations between Hegemony and Equality“. In Unequal Partners, ed. Harald von Riekhoff and Hanspeter Neuhold. San Francisco: Westview Press,.

Shaaron, C& Victoria, C. (1998). Women under the Third Reich: A Biographical Dictionary. London: Greenwood Press Publisher.

Weinberg, G. (1994). Review of Klaus Reinhardt, and Karl B. Keenan ‘Moscow—The Turning Point. The Failure of Hitler’s Strategy in the winter of 1941–1942’.Central European History, 27, (pp 251-253). London: Cambridge University Press.

Weinberg, G. (2006). Adolf Hitler. Redmond, WA: Microsoft Corporation.

In his speech, Adolf Hitler makes it very clear that it is not sufficient to develop only art. The type of art has to offer a theme that creates a transformation in the society¹.

Hitler asks artists to conform to what his outlook on art is since it is his belief that he has an absolute right basing on his significant participation in restoring German art. He gives a reason that the present Germany is a result of the efforts of himself and partners in the nation’s struggle which offered art in Germany fresh incentives as well as environment for a better and prosperous development.

The Bolshevik art collectors and other literary accomplices played a role in art. However, they should not be credited for laying a base for fresh artistry or further development apparent in Germany. Those were statements made by Hitler.He asserts that him and his friends should be credited with developing the nation and have gone ahead to give large amounts of money as incentives for the development of art. Hitler makes an undertaking to completely change the way art is viewed in Germany.

He vows to alter phrases commonly known in Germany’s art that cannot be understood and are acceptable by only big elucidations for their utility. He says that such art will never be imposed on the people of Germany.

Hitler asserts that more interest has to be on the artist’s ability rather than an artist’s presumed intention. Any artist who wishes to have his art exhibited in German museums has to show ability. Intention is a thing which is automatically evident. He claims that some artists have attempted to develop a more palatable form of art by portraying them as manifestations of a fresh age. However, it is Hitler’s concern that it is not art which develops a fresher age.

Nonetheless, it is the general life of individuals which develops itself afresh and hence regularly attempts to portray itself in a new way. Hitler also does not support the view that art which was exhibited many years ago should still be exhibited in the new age. His reason is that it is improper for art to go way back from the stage of development that the society already finds itself in. Art has to be used as a symbol of the importance of development already reached in life.

Hitler’s ideas are that art has to begin incorporating the beauty of life as it is. He vilifies the nature of art which only focuses on the bad things that occur in life such as deformed people, ugly creatures, and the unfortunate things in life. He makes an allusion to the strong people seen in Olympics today as the new age of art that artists need to really focus on.

Making judgment upon some of the art exhibited, Hitler amusingly notes that there are artists who only see the structures of German people through decayed cretins alone and see colors in different dimensions and wish to claim that it is the only way they can interpret art.

In vindicating himself from any criticism, Hitler claims that this idea is to prevent such unfortunate circumstances. He claims to help artists who appear to suffer from a defect in their sense of vision and come up with their version of art and impose on modern people the results of their wrong perceptions as art. Since art is meant for the people, then art has to conform to the wishes of the people who consume the art and not the wishes of the artist. Whether Hitler’s views are acceptable is only for the reader to decide, but he clearly offered his take on what German art ought to be.

Bibliography

German History in Documents and Images, Hitler’s Speech at the Opening of the House of German Art in Munich, GHDT, 7, (1937): 1-4.

Footnotes

¹. German History in Documents and Images, Hitler’s Speech at the Opening of the House of German Art in Munich, GHDT, 7, (1937): 1.

Introduction

Hitler is widely regarded as the most disreputable world leader of all time and the crimes committed by his regime are still viewed as the most atrocious in modern history. His rule was marked by the killing of millions of Jews and a dictatorial rule that saw Germany turned into a police state.

However, Hitler was also a charismatic ruler who was able to inspire the people with his ideas and restore German’s prosperity after the Second World War. His influence was so great that the Nazi party was popularly known as the “Hitler movement”. This Nazi ruler made use of the constitution to take power and hence demonstrated that he could make use of popular public consent.

Considering this contradictory phases of Hitler’s regime, it would be useful to research on the nature of Hitler’s rule in order to gain a deeper understanding of the form of leadership that Hitler employed. This paper will analyse the extent to which Hitler ruled Germany with popular consent in order to demonstrate that while Hitler was primarily an authoritarian ruler, he led the country with a lot of popular consent from the masses.

Hitler’s Rise to Power

The Nazi Party was formed in 1919 as a Right Wing group that promised to restore the country’s prestige following the humiliating defeat in World War I and the subsequent imposition of the Treaty of Versailles on Germany. Hitler joined the party in its first years and rose to the rank of chief propagandist for the party. His brilliant oratory skills and leadership abilities led to his being made Chairman of the party.

Hitler and his Nazi party gained formal power following the 1928 election where the party won 12 seats. This modest achievement indicated that the party had a significant following in the country and people were willing to follow Hitler’s leadership (Orlow 1982). The Reichstag elections of July 1932 were very favourable for the Nazi Party, which acquired 37% of the votes making it the majority party in the German parliament.

Hitler was made the Chancellor of the Weimar Republic in January 1933. Hitler’s absolute hold on power was achieved in 1934 when he consolidated the office of the president and that of the chancellor in the person of “the Fuhrer and Reich Chancellor Adolf Hitler”.

Rule by Popular Public Consent

Once Hitler and the Nazi party had seized all power, they implemented policies that turned the country into a dictatorship. Even so, Hitler still engaged in some form of rule through popular consent. Once Hitler was appointed Chancellor in 1933, some positive changes became evident in Germany. Many people acquired steady jobs and security was restored.

These factors made people hope for a better future under Hitler. Gellately (2002) observes that in the early years, Hitler was keen not to make any illegal moves that might turn the people against him. Instead, all illegal moves were presented as necessary measures to protect the German population from a communist revolution.

Orlow (1982) documents that the middle and upper middle class Germans were the main supporters of Hitler’s actions since they believed that he could prevent a feared communist takeover of Germany and restore Germany’s glory.

The masses were willing to live under the Nazi dictatorship in exchange prosperity, security, and good governance. Gellately (2002) suggests that Hitler did not have to use terror to force the majority into line since most Germans had already become emotionally invested in the Nazi dictatorship, which promised to bring them prosperity and protect them from crime and a communist takeover of the country.

As early as 1935, Hitler was already formulating policies that were popular with the masses. Corner (2009) documents that Hitler’s announcement that general military service was being reintroduced in contravention of the prohibitions of the Versailles Treaty was met with euphoria by the masses.

The masses were in support of Hitler’s major rearmament activity that saw the army expanding to a larger size that the Treaty of Versailles allowed. This demonstrates that Hitler was able to garner large portions of popular approval for his policies and the ideas behind them.

Unlike other European dictators such as Stalin and Mussolini who set out to break large segments of the population to their will, Hitler hoped to achieve an authoritarian rule that had popular backing. The Nazi regime was therefore deeply concerned about popular opinion and how the masses reacted to government action.

Hitler did not just want the people to adjust themselves to the new system of government but rather to be enthusiastic supporters of it. This notion is best articulated by Gellately (2002) who reveals that the Nazis wanted the public to believe that what Hitler did was in the best interest of the Germans.

The Fuhrer myth, which presented Hitler as a heroic figure defending popular justice and restoring order in Germany, was integral to his hold on power. Viereck (2004) declares that believe in the Fuhrer myth by the German masses was so important that without it even the combination of army, concentration camps, and a lying press could not have succeeded in keeping Hitler in power.

This myth effectively dissociated Hitler from the party and the government and he was seen as a symbol of the ideal Germany. This myth resulted in an enthusiastic popular consent that was critical in Hitler’s maintenance of power in Germany.

The Fuhrer myth enabled the masses to excuse Hitler if things went wrong because the public could place the blame on the officials under Hitler’s command since they were the individuals who actually executed the orders.

Majority of the German population supported the crackdown on people who were labelled political criminals by the Nazi. The concentration camps where such elements were sent were widely publicized and many Germans were generally in favour of them. The general population believed that such camps were necessary to maintain the security of the country and ensure that social unrest did not occur.

Gellately (2002) elaborates that the citizens were “pleased that the police put away people commonly regarded as criminals and the dregs of society” (p.212). Hitler’s crackdown on criminals and political opponents was therefore done with public consent. Noakes (1980) reveals that there was massive participation by many professionals in Nazi policies such as doctors, nurses, and lawyers.

These individuals were not fanatics and they participated in Nazi policies on their own volition. This demonstrates that Hitler’s policies were embraced by many Germans who contributed to the implementations of these policies.

The coercive practices and repression carried out by Hitler’s regime happened with the support of the masses. Hitler’s rule was marked by widespread persecution and confinement of people who were marked out as enemies of the state. These “enemies” were mostly individuals on the margins of the society and the public perceived them as a threat.

Gellately (2002) illustrates that these targets of discrimination were not chosen out of the mere prejudices and dislikes of Hitler. On the contrary, the definition of “enemy” was a reflection of the wish of the people. Their persecution and discrimination by the Nazi regime therefore won many supporters for Hitler.

Even when citizens expressed disagreement with certain policies of the Nazi regime, they often demonstrated greater consent in other areas and therefore led to an overall support for Hitler’s policies. Bankie (1992) states that while many Germans were disgruntled by the increased surveillance, they celebrated the security that intense police action brought to their streets.

Ordinary citizens aided the Gestapo in its work by spying on their friends. Noakes (1980) documents that the Gestapo did not have sufficient manpower to spy on all Germans and 80% of denunciations were made by fellow citizens.

This increased the surveillance ability of the Gestapo and over 50% of German’s Communist party members were incarcerated by the Gestapo. Gestapo files reveal that the enforcement of Hitler’s racial policies was only possible by the help of ordinary citizens who voluntarily denounced their fellow citizens.

Hitler took up policies that increased the popularity of his regime with many groups. In the mid-1930s, he embarked on a privatization effort that saw the transfer of public ownership of companies to the private sector.

Noakes (1980) states that this move was popular with the masses and it enhanced government support therefore strengthening Nazi rule. The business community was impressed by the privatization efforts and they supported Hitler. Privatization had a positive impact on the nation’s economy and this endeared Hitler to the masses.

Use of Propaganda

Hitler’s mass appeal was by the large a creation of the Nazi propaganda machine. The Nazi was able to make popular comments and tell the masses what they wanted to hear. Associating with the German press and film tycoon, Alfred Hugenberg gave Hitler and his party unrestricted access to the media. Hitler was therefore able to spread his propaganda with great success and manipulate the media to achieve his ends.

The Nazi propaganda system was run by Joseph Goebbels who created the Fuhrer myth and spread Nazi ideology to Germans. Control of the press helped the Nazi to exert influence over public opinion and this was very important since Hitler endeavoured to rule under popular support.

The Nazi propaganda machine exaggerated on the successes of Germany’s foreign policy and the economic achievements gained under Hitler’s rule. People were therefore able to convince themselves of Hitler’s advantages and saw the positive sides of the new dictatorship that he created (Gellately 2002).

Propaganda was used to elicit the support of the public for the expanding missions of the Gestapo, using concentration camps, and discriminating against the Jewish population. The concentration camps were presented in the media as boot camps where political criminals and other anti-social elements would be rehabilitated through work therapy.

The media fabricated stories of how effective and radical preventive approaches were being used to ensure that criminals would not reoffend. Hitler used propaganda to demonise the Jews and this led to the development of the popular opinion that removing the Jews from Germany was the appropriate action (Bankie 1992).

Such misleading information led to the support and approval of policies that the public might have been opposed to if they had not been misled by propaganda.

Rule through Coercion

Hitler’s rule resulted in the loss of individual rights and freedoms by the German population. Individuals lost their freedom of speech and expression and criticism of Hitler and the Nazi state was forbidden. It is rumoured that the Gestapo kept files on every adult and regular reports on the person were made through information obtained from ordinary citizens who acted as informants.

Those who were found guilty of criticizing the regime were interrogated and sometimes tortured. If found guilty, the individual was sent to a concentration camp or even executed (Orlow 1982). Such an environment ensured that Hitler could rule without the consent of the people and no one could speak up for fear of repercussions.

The vocal detractors of Hitler were confronted with violence and this decreased opposition to Hitler. Specifically, the Nazi SS paramilitary wiped out all non-Nazi organizations and political parties in small waves of terror. The Nazi was left as the only active party in Germany many people followed its policies since there was no alternative.

Hitler’s regime politicized all aspects of public life and this helped it to gain greater control of the public. Most behaviour of individuals in public was scrutinized and the citizens could get into trouble for insignificant things such as listing to jazz music (Bankie 1992).

Such tight control of society by Hitler was not done with the consent of the masses and people only obliged since they feared punishment. People were always reminded of the penalties for opposition to Hitler and this led to coerced conformity. Using the Gestapo, Hitler had effectively turned Germany into a surveillance state and people were aware that they were under close observation by the government.

The Schutzstaffel (SS), which began as a subunit of the storm troopers (SA), grew to be the most influential military apparatus of the Nazis.

This paramilitary organization was unofficially referred to as “Hitler’s black-shirted personal bodyguards” and it was made up of individuals who were fanatically loyal to Hitler (Orlow 1982). The unquestioning allegiance to Hitler meant that the SS would do anything to ensure that Hitler’s rule was unopposed. This group therefore dealt severely with all parties that were opposed to Hitler’s rule.

Conclusion

This paper set out to argue that while Hitler’s rule was dictatorial in nature and made use of violence and intimidation, this Nazi leader mostly engaged in rule through popular public consent. The many atrocities attributed to the Nazi regime were done with the support of many Germans. It has articulated that Hitler made use of terror and popular consent to rule the Germans.

Hitler was able to gain the backing of most people even as he turned the country from a democracy into a dictatorship. Hitler’s popularity with the masses was unquestionable and many people supported his foreign policy and action against political criminals and anti-socials. The people continued to support him even as he established the Gestapo and made concentration camps.

The terror tactics employed by Hitler’s regime targeted specific groups and most Germans were left unharmed. The paper has shown that while Hitler employed repressive measures and propaganda, his rule was mostly by popular consent. All blame must therefore not be laid on Hitler and his top officials for the atrocities committed under the Nazi regime.

References

Bankie, D 1992, The Germans and the Final Solution: Public Opinion under Nazism, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Corner, P 2009, Popular Opinion in Totalitarian Regimes: Fascism, Nazism, Communism, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Gellately, R 2002, Backing Hitler: Consent and Coercion in Nazi Germany: Consent and Coercion in Nazi Germany, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Noakes, Jeremy. “Government, party, and people in Nazi Germany”. University of Exeter Press, 1980.

Orlow, D 1982, ‘The Historiography of the Decline of Bruning and the Rise of the Nazis: Comment and Review Article’, Hamburger Beitrage zur Sozial- und Zeitgeschichte, vol. 16 no.1, pp. 748-792.

Viereck, P 2004, Metapolitics: From Wagner and the German Romantics to Hitler, Transaction Publishers, London.

Establishing a Sense of Urgency

Adolf Hitler and the Nazi individuals treated Germans as one group. In an attempt to win the favor of Germans, he used to identify “criminals” that he considered being responsible for Germany’s fate. Some of the criminals included the November 1918 criminals that favored armistice. He also referred to Jews as racially corrupt individuals that mainly wanted to exploit the Volk. He despised Marxist communists on the basis that they favored the notion of a class instead of the nation. He capitalized on the ‘act of arson on Reichstag building’ to instill panic amongst the citizens and gain people’s support in the next election. He further rallied his allies to convince the unstable Reichstag to pass the dictatorial Act that initiated the Nazi revolution.

Creating the Guiding Coalition

The effort to strengthen the regime alongside weakening the opposition made him adopt multiple strategies. He detained opponents without trial, infringed the autonomy of Catholic and Protestant churches, dissolved the German Labor Movement, retrenched non-Aryans, and dismantled Czechoslovakia.

Developing Change Vision

Three platforms were used to guide Hitler’s vision for change: anti-Semitism, Pan-Germanism, and anti-Bolshevism. He used his most essential weapon, speech to convey his intentions to supporters. His declaration targeted the dismantling of the Versailles Treaty, returning forcefully exiled Germans to Reich, eliminating the Jews, expanding German territory eastwards, eliminating Marxists, and acquiring ample dwelling places for the Aryan race.

Communicating the Vision for buy-in

According to Otto Strasser, Adolf Hitler perfected in reading the minds and mood of his audience. This guaranteed favors from the audience. He could design and enforce his purpose to people with the help of his self-dramatizing ability. This was evidenced when he became furious about minority Germans that lived abroad. Nuremberg rallies that were conducted in September revealed his ability to “move” the crowd’s feelings.

Empowering Broad-Based Action

Hitler prohibited all other parties except the Nazis after having obtained the Enabling Act. He reorganized the legal system to further empower the Nazi regime. He established concentration camps that were responsible for the detention of opponents without trial. He retrenched non-Aryans. Jews’ civil rights were also withdrawn to enhance the devolution of the Nazi regime to the Holocaust. Versailles settlements were also rolled back. Czechoslovakia was then dismantled.

Generating short-term wins

Lebensraum formed one of the compensation techniques to woe his supporters. Hitler wanted growth in the German population. Consequently, he targeted Russia and Poland among other populations that were deemed inferior. The invasion was meant to repopulate the invaded regions with upper-class Germans. The strategy was implemented in 1939 with Poland becoming the first victim. Starvation was used to exterminate original inhabitants of the invaded regions.

Never Letting Up

Following the lengthy hatred talk about Jews in 1922, Hitler stood firm on his decision. This saw him maintain the unwavering objective through the 1935 Nuremberg Laws, the November 1938 pogrom to the Warsaw Ghetto destruction, and the Auschwitz and Mauthausen death camps. His focus aimed at exterminating Jews in entire Europe. He made the objective policy for Germany. His dedication towards the purpose was responsible for the successful extermination of 4-4.5 million Jews under his tenure. The objective paralleled other purposes such as the expansion of his territory and the elimination of other enemies.

Incorporating Changes into the Culture

The pursuit and successful granting of the Enabling Act prohibited all other parties except the Nazi’s. By so doing, Hitler could easily implement his plans in Germany without any opposition. Hitler’s persistence towards his purposes contributed to his success in incorporating changes into the culture of Germans. He could patiently insist on an idea even if he entre party was against it.

January 30, 1933 – Hitler Became the Fuhrer

A year before, there was a great deal of confusion among the various government agencies that were supposed to manage and govern Germany. It was a sign of weakness, the very thing that I had predicted in my public speeches. I told the German people that they could no longer trust a government that sold out to the enemy at the end of the Great War.

I was compelled to take a stand or else foreign armies and foreign governments are going to carve up the fatherland. I speak with authority on this subject matter, because lands are being annexed left and right immediately after the failed war effort. I need to make a stand. In the preceding years, it was made clear to me that aside from the puppet masters in Great Britain and France, the influential leaders that are trying to exploit the weakness of the German government, there exists a subtle attack from within. It comes in the form of a twisted ideology. Communists are trying to destroy this country from the inside. I am justified in creating the Nazi Party. It is the only hope of the fatherland, the chance to resurrect the nation from the ashes of defeat. I am going to lead this group through the assistance of the children of the Aryan Race.

It was a great relief for me, and I was overjoyed when President Paul von Hindenburg spoke out my name and linked it forevermore to the term of “fuhrer” because by doing so, he had anointed me to become the leader over all the German people. Through that simple gesture, Hindenburg transformed me from an ordinary politician into the embodiment of the German’s people political will (Adolf Hitler). Before the election, I made a vow to my countrymen that if I will be chosen as their ultimate leader, I promised to end all forms of political bickering, because this is not the time for caution or indecisive leadership. My party and my band of dedicated followers had been given the mandate to change things for the better. This country is no longer the laughingstock of Europe. It is time to make Germany great again.

June 30, 1934 – Night of the Long Knives

I cannot say that I regretted the creation of the Sturmabteilung, the German Assault Division, more popularly known as the Storm Troopers. I cannot make that call, because in my heart of hearts I knew that I owe a great debt of gratitude to them. If not for the help of the Storm Troopers, it is hard to imagine how I could have been persuasive in the eyes of the German elites. It was the SA that gave me the edge during one of the darkest moments in German history. I have to make it clear that the SA was the critical factor in getting me elected into the highest seat of power. However, the authority that I delegated to the SA had gone straight into the head of some of the leaders. I am both sad and angry that these leaders who once swore allegiance to me are now plotting something sinister. Furthermore, I find it harder each day to rein in the SA. I no longer trust Ernst Rohm to lead this group.

Several days earlier I had secret meetings with the top leaders of the Schutzstaffel or Germany’s Protective Echelon to carry out a purge of the SA leadership. I received reports that they were successful in assassinating at least a dozen rogue leaders of the SA including Ernst Rohm (Night of the Long Knives). From this day forward, the SA will no longer play a critical role in nation-building. From this moment on, all the security requirements of the Nazi Party are going to be fulfilled by the able leadership of the SS. I am also considering the use of the SS as the primary law enforcement arm of the state and the Nazi Party.

November 10, 1938 – Kristallnacht or Night of Crystal

I have not been remiss in my duty warning the German people about the Jews. They are the worst kind. I cannot stand the thought of them mixing their blood with the pure genes of the Aryan Race. I cannot bear the thought of them living in my country. I cringe at the thought that I have them as neighbors. As I have written in my manifesto, they are unkempt and deceitful people. They are men and women of questionable character. Someday I will be able to come up with a perfect solution to the Jewish question.

The internal cleansing of my homeland from the filthy influence of the Jewish people had started in earnest a few weeks ago. Thousands of Polish Jews were expelled from this country. However, I was surprised by the reaction of the Jewish community in Paris. One of their own, a teenager named Herschel Grynszpan dared to shoot and murder Ernst vom Rath, a German embassy official stationed in Paris, France (Kristallnacht).

I need not order the SA or the SS to retaliate. The people are already disgusted with the Jews, and this violent incident involving a diplomat easily ignited the fury of the poor German people. I heard the news of fierce reprisals against the remaining Jewish communities in Germany and Austria. Ordinary citizens were enraged by the news of the assassination of the said embassy official. Therefore, ordinary citizens went out of their way to destroy Jewish-owned businesses.

I also received reports that broken glasses lined up the streets. These chards of glass came from the broken windows of Jewish homes, synagogues, and shops. I asked for clarifications as to what triggered the spontaneous response of the citizens. I was told that it all started when Joseph Goebbels made a speech in front of an assembly comprised of soldiers, supporters, party members, and old friends in Munich. People were enraptured by Goebbels speech, and that was the reason for the spontaneous expressions of outrage. I hope that this type of sentiment snowballs into something that makes it easier to once and for all eliminate the Jews from both Germany and Europe.

September 1, 1939 – Nazi Germany Invaded Poland

I condemned the attacks that were made against the Silesian city located in Gleiwitz. It was an unprovoked attack. Various witnesses positively identified Polish soldiers crossing the border a few days earlier to lay siege to the city. I had no clue as to the real motives of the perpetrators of the said violent act; however, it was clear that they were targeting the city’s radio station.

I am now the Chancellor of the German government, and I am compelled to devise an appropriate response. After careful consideration, the best course of action is to meet force with force (NYT’s The Learning Network). I made a directive to the German army prefacing my command with the statement that the rationale for all military actions from this day forward is nothing more than the need to assert our independence and the right to defend the fatherland from all forms of foreign invasion.

I approved to implementation of a battle strategy called the “blitzkrieg” or a lightning attack that calls for the rapid deployment of troops. The early reports were encouraging enough. I was told that the enemy forces suffered thousands of casualties. Poland’s standing army, which numbered more than half a million was no match for the fast-paced movement of the German troops. The enemy’s defense systems were overwhelmed by the speed and the quality of the troops that were deployed behind enemy lines.

I hope that the whole world recognizes the rejuvenated power of the German army. I hope that our opponents are quaking in fear. I am confident that the enemy of the German people are going to think twice before they try to trifle with the members of the Aryan Race.

April 30, 1945

How did it come to this point? Three years ago I had the world under my boots. My blitzkrieg attacks in Poland, France, and Africa sent tremors all over the world. My forces pounded London and brought the city to her knees. A few years before that glorious event, the French army surrendered without a fight. I was better than Napoleon Bonaparte, my range went beyond the borders of this continent and my influence reached Asia.

From a strategic standpoint, if I am given another chance to rebuild the Third Reich, I am going to do things differently. I will still follow the same path I took to the heights of power and glory. However, my major adjustments will be the way I treated the Russians and the Americans. I underestimated their capability because I focused a significant portion of my energy and military resources on defeating France and Great Britain. I did not give much thought to the capabilities of the other armies.

I received reports that the Russian army was able to breach the gates of Germany and the American forces are not far behind. In a few hours, this bunker is not going to provide the necessary protection.

I cannot be humiliated in front of a kangaroo court. I cannot be humiliated in front of a firing squad or exposed as a common criminal hanging by the gallows. I am the master of my fate. I refuse to let Stalin or Truman control my destiny.

My final orders to my loyal lieutenants are to make sure that I am dead after ingesting the cyanide capsules and to dispose of my body in the most appropriate manner (Rothman). I gave strict instructions to cremate my body. I plan to take a couple of cyanide capsules, but I will not wait for it to take effect. I am going to use my sidearm to end it all.

It was a glorious run starting in the 1920s. My greatest pride and joy was the creation of the Nazi Party. I regret that I was not able to deliver my promise of a thousand-year reign for the Aryan Race. I regret that I was not able to facilitate the ultimate solution to the Jewish question. However, Europe will know that I tried my best.

Works Cited

“Night of the Long Knives.” Encyclopaedia Britannica, 2013, Web.

“Adolf Hitler is Named Chancellor of Germany.” History.com, 2017, Web.

“Kristallnacht: A Nationwide Pogrom.” United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, 2017, Web.

NYT’s The Learning Network. “Nazi Germany Invades Poland Starting World War II.”

The New York Times. 2011, Web.

Rothman, Lily. “How the World Learned of Hitler’s Death.” Time. 2015, Web.

November 10th, 1923

Yesterday, our attempt to seize the power in Germany failed. Beer Hall Putsch that we organized was supposed to proclaim the beginning of a national revolution in the country. Together with more than six hundred people supporting me, I tried to explain my opinion on further development o the country to ones from our government. Even though we were armed our attempt was not successful – common people were not ready to support us.

January 30th, 1933

Today is a great day as I have found the road to real power. Now, everyone knows that ideas that my people support deserve attention, and this is why everything is going to change. Today, I became the Chancellor of Germany and it means that I am going to change the way other people see our country. Germany will no longer be in ruin.

June 30th, 1934

The acme of power involves making important but difficult decisions. Today, we are going to conduct Operation Hummingbird to estrange those who do not want us to be the primary political power. Rohm and his supporters must be planning to drive us from office but all betrayers will be punished (Wilcox 217).

November 10th, 1938

Ernst vom Rath was killed in Paris by one of the Jewish people yesterday, and such an act will not be forgiven. I feel that there is a need to show them what happens when they dare to do something like that. Today, I gave a command to start Kristallnacht that Jews will remember for a long time (Dean 385).

April 30th, 1945

Today is one of the most disappointing days in my life – there is no hope that something will change for the better. The war is lost and Red Army is already in Berlin. If I was supposed to summarize everything that has happened recently, I would say that my dreams about the new world order were not destined to come true. Ones who deserve my trust should understand that there is only one way out for me and Eva. Goodbye, Germany!

Works Cited

Dean, Martin. “Kreutzmuller, Christoph. Final Sale in Berlin: The Destruction of Jewish Commercial Activity, 1930-1945.” The German Quarterly, vol. 89, no. 3, 2016, pp. 385-387.

Wilcox, Clifton. The Rise of the Nazi SS. Xlibris Corporation, 2015.

The escape of Adolf Hitler from invading Soviet forces is, perhaps, one of the 20^th Century’s most intriguing cold cases. It is no secret that Hitler was ruthless, as evidenced by his own judiciary’s complaints of human mistreatment in concentration camps (Graver et al. 854). There are three contending theories as to the exact nature of events when Nazi Germany faced its inevitable collapse. The first proposal is that when defeat was imminent, the German leader sat on a couch and shot himself in the head, instantly ending his life. The second proposal is the idea that the dictator bit a cyanide pill after instructing his loyal bodyguards to incinerate his body in the garden outside the bunker. The third theory asserts the fact that upon realizing that the war was at its conclusion, the Führer implemented a devious plan to escape right under the noses of the advancing Soviet forces. The assertion that Hitler escaped Berlin is plausible given the scientific know-how, wealth, and international connections the German leader had cultivated in the time he had subjugated the surrounding territories.

The escape of Adolf Hitler from Berlin has been shrouded in mystery. After the war and the apparent death of the German dictator, American and British intelligence services received numerous reports that the former German leader was alive. According to an article by Robert Philpot in “The Times of Israel,” the reports indicated that Hitler was seen in Egypt as a Muslim convert, in Ireland dressed as a woman, and in a coffee house in Amsterdam. The most famous of the theories posit that the Führer had been smuggled out of Berlin and flown to a German base in Denmark and hidden on a u-boat (Philpot). The boat made its way across the Atlantic, after which Hitler arrived by horseback on an Argentinian ranch (Philpot). The fact that Hitler escaped Berlin was demonstrated when a 2009 DNA test on a scull in Moscow believed to be the Führer’s turned out to be a woman’s (Philpot). The scientific assessment of the remains further deepened the mystery of Hitler’s whereabouts after the collapse of Nazi Germany.

The evidence suggesting the fact that Hitler escaped death in Berlin is evident in how the matter was addressed after Germany’s defeat. Historical records demonstrate that after the Soviet officers under the command of Marshal Zhukov reported to Western news outlets that the Führer’s body had been retrieved, they were immediately contradicted by Stalin (Philpot). The Soviet leader revealed to president Roosevelt’s close confidant, Harry Hopkins, that the German leader was still alive, an assertion that was later supported by Zhukov, who reversed his earlier claims (Philpot). The aforementioned claims are given credence by the fact that important members of the Soviet government, many of whom participated in the defeat of Nazi Germany are confident that Hitler escaped. Evidence from a 1945 British intelligence report notes that the “only conclusive evidence that Hitler is dead would be in the discovery, and certain identification, of the body” (Robinson). The report further states that in the absence of the aforementioned evidence, one must rely on circumstantial accounts provided by individuals believed to have witnessed the Führer’s fate.

There has been speculation regarding the Soviet leader’s statements concerning Hitler’s whereabouts after the collapse of Nazi Germany. It has been argued that his assertion that the dictator was alive was an attempt to cover up a botched investigation (Philpot). If the latter statement were true, one could consider the possibility that the soldiers sent to investigate were too terrified to admit that they had failed to recover the Führer’s body. They then gathered whatever they could find and claimed it was the body they had sought to identify. Such actions would help explain the DNA result on a piece of skull that was thought to belong to the former German leader.

The reports of Hitler’s apparent death are further compounded by reports made by his successor. The Supreme Commander of the Navy at the time, Admiral Karl Dönitz stated on May 1945, that Hitler had died while leading his troops in Berlin (Robinson). This contradicted the commonly held view proposed by Trevor Roper, a British historian, and intelligence officer, that the dictator had shot himself and committed suicide. The latter proposal was further contradicted by the Soviet regime that claimed that the Führer had died by poisoning. It is evident that Trevor Roper’s services had been procured by the British government in an attempt to dissuade the world from believing the possibility that the German leader was free and residing in a European country. In addition, the Soviet’s response was intended to demonstrate their superiority and the fact that Hitler had chosen a coward’s way out. Any admission that the dictator had escaped would have weakened their political position in the region.

There are some issues with Trevor Roger’s account of Hitler’s death. For instance, the investigator used a few first-hand accounts to string together a tale of the German leader’s apparent suicide. The historian only had access to a small number of witnesses that were incarcerated by British and American authorities (Robinson). In addition, the individuals thought to have executed Hitler’s last wishes were reported missing or thought to be dead. It is also worth considering the fact that Hitler’s inner circle was under the Soviet Union’s custody and was largely unavailable to corroborate the historian’s account of the tale. The conditions under which the witnesses to Hitler’s death were subjected while in custody must also be considered. Is it possible that the people were coerced to narrate a tale that addressed the prevalent political interests at the time? This is another piece of the puzzle that remains unanswered. There is a possibility that the witnesses swore to protect the German leader’s secret at whatever cost, given the fact that they were strong believers in his ideology.

The view that Hitler escaped Berlin is plausible in view of the fact that the German leader had amassed resources and cultivated international connections as he subjugated the surrounding territories. The assertion that an individual as adept at subterfuge and cruelty would have failed to implement a plan to safeguard his life in a war that spanned years is laughable. The lack of concrete forensic evidence and the excessive reliance on eyewitness accounts from individuals subjected to torture deems lessens the credibility of theories asserting that he died in his bunker. In addition, the persistent conflict as to whether he ingested cyanide or shot himself adds to the confusion. The flurry of reports to intelligence agencies indicating that Hitler had been seen in various parts of the world increases the possibility that he escaped. The evidence, or its lack thereof, supports the idea that the Führer was well aware of his circumstances and implemented a plan to escape the Soviets as they brought down the Nazi regime.

Works Cited

Graver, Hans Petter, et al. “Why Adolf Hitler Spared the Judges: Judicial Opposition Against the Nazi State.” German Law Journal, vol. 19, no. 4, 2018, pp. 845–78, Web.

Philpot, Robert. “‘Hitler Lived’: Scholar Explores the Conspiracies That Just Won’t Die.” The Times of Israel, Web.

Robinson, Matt. “Did Hitler Escape to Argentina In 1945? – Mythbusting Berlin.” Berlin Experiences, Web.

“Hitler and Stalin: Parallel Lives” is a book written by Allan Bullock that talks about the parallelism in Hitler and Stalin’s lives – their success, failures, involvement in politics, economic downfalls, wars, and many more. On the other hand, the movie East/West talks about the situation between USSR and Germany. This movie is somehow related to Bullock’s book because of the characters and the flow of events that were highlighted in the movie.

“East-West” is basically an old-style, behind-the-Iron-Curtain drama-adventure. The action kicks off in June ’46 onboard a ship bound to Odesa that’s full of Russians tempted back by the Soviet government’s offer of an amnesty to anyone who skipped the country in the past 30 years. But their joy at returning to the motherland is soon cut short when, immediately upon arrival in Stalin’s gray Soviet Union, they’re either shot or sent off to gulags.

Because of his badly needed skills as a doctor, Alexei Golovin (Russo star Oleg Menshikov, from “Burnt by the Sun” and “The Barber of Siberia”) is given a job as a chief health officer at a weaving factory in Kyiv and manages to save his French wife, Marie (Bonnaire), from a brutal interrogation by secret police chief Pirogov (Grigori Manukov), who tries to brand her a Western spy.

Alexei, Marie, and their young son are assigned a room in a multifamily apartment, and Marie is given a job in the wardrobe department of an army song-and-dance troupe. Their marriage comes under strain as Marie realizes she’s trapped in the country and Alexei acknowledges that he’s blundered big-time in deciding to return home.

When Alexei admits he’s slept with Olga (Tatyana Dogilova), the apartment “supervisor” who lives in the room opposite, Marie kicks him out. Alexei moves in with Olga and shares duties with Made in looking after their son.

While Alexei pretends to be a good Soviet citizen, Marie becomes friendly with fellow tenant Sasha (Sergei Bodrov Jr.). A champion swimmer who’s lost his motivation since his grandmother was carted off to a camp, Sasha is encouraged by Marie to train on his own in hopes of being selected for a Euro meet — and thereby help her get out after he’s defeated.

She also makes a personal appeal for help to left-wing French actress Gabrielle Develay (Deneuve), who’s visiting with the Theatre National Populaire in a Victor Hugo play. Pic’s last hour centers on Marie and Sasha’s attempts to escape, climaxing almost seven years later in a bold plan by Gabrielle to whisk Marie and her son to safety while the musical troupe is visiting Bulgaria.

Early on, it’s apparent that the movie is an old-fashioned heroes-and-villains yarn, with all of the Soviets portrayed as slogan-spouting bad guys, every doorway concealing secret police, and the production design and muted-color lensing hammering home the drabness of the place. But in the initial stages, the performance of Bonnaire and Menshikov do at least create an emotional center for the movie, as wife and husband stick to each other to try to survive their massive mistake.

When the couple separates, the film starts to lose its focus, and in a movie whose dialogue is a good 50% in Russian, Bonnaire becomes sidelined as the young swimmer’s story is developed. The final half-hour is a dramatic jumble, with captions suddenly jumping the story ahead by months and years as if the filmmakers are running out of time to squeeze everything into two hours. There are also signs throughout of considerable cutting during post-production.

Less is certainly not more in the case of “East-West,” which has enough dramatic potential to sustain a longer running time and when composer Patrick Doyle’s symphonic score is at full tilt and Wargnier lets the visuals breathe, attains a Romanesque sweep.

The last couple of reels, as Marie plans to escape and learns the truth of Alexei’s apparent cooperation with the authorities, hint at the powerful, emotional movie “East-West” could have been. Too often, though, the dialogue is saddled with token exchanges: “I love you, Marie.” “It’s finished, Alexei.” “It will never be finished between us, Marie.”

Bonnaire, as usual, looks natural in period duds but – as Deneuve shows, when she finally strides into the frame, exuding grand dame from every pore – doesn’t have the stature to carry a big movie of this kind. Menshikov is generally good, especially in scenes where he is called on to play duplicitous games with Party members. Bodrov – sort of “Prisoner of the Mountains” director, who co-scripted here — is focused and intense as the young swimmer.

The film repeatedly compares communism to Hitler’s Germany, but it is East-West itself that perpetuates the most insidious kind of fascist propaganda. Wargnier’s film attacks the specter of “communism” with the same tools that Leni Riefenstahl employed in the 1930s. The miasma of communism – represented by silly accordion bands in monochromatic uniforms, the absolute rule of suspicion, and the triumph of the weak over the powerful – is set in contrast to the beauty of physical form represented by a young Olympian (Sergei Bodrov Jr.). His sculpted body is consistently threatened by the Stalinist government. As Wargnier crosscuts between emotionally manipulative scenes with Spielberg’s calculation, the swells of Patrick Doyle’s Wagnerian musical score suggest the grandeur and potency of a “freedom” at best poorly understood, at worst reified.

Certainly, Stalin’s oppressiveness should be remembered and not repeated. Yet in the romantic tradition of the classic cinema to which Wargnier pays homage, the specificities of Stalin’s communism are too easily equated with communism (or indeed Marxism) in general. This conflation is in fact so common that it slips by virtually unnoticed.

The ideological potency of a film must be great when it prompts such a gainfully employed critic to contradict himself so plainly. Only in the arena of cinema can nations be thus felled by the tremble of a woman’s lip. Like Indochina, East-West is visually stunning, but like a fourth of July fireworks display, its employment in the service of nationalism tarnishes its color.

The movie is informative and entertaining. It gives life to what we just normally read or see in books, like the Parallel Lives. But the movie failed to give justice to history. There are elements in the movie that do not coincide with one another. There are parts of the history that are not mentioned even if they are important aspects of the major character’s lives. There’s nothing extraordinary for this film aside from being partly historical.