Hitler’s Foreign Policy” free essay sample

In 1923 Hitler attempted a coup detat, known as the  Beer Hall Putsch. The failed coup resulted in Hitlers imprisonment and during this time he wrote his memoir,  Mein Kampf. After this, he gained support by promoting  Pan-Germanium,  anti-Semitism, and anti-communism with an incredible charismatic oratory and an effective propaganda. Then, in 1933, Hitler came finally to power, as Chancellor and transformed the Weimar Republic  into the  Third Reich, a  single-party  dictatorship based on the totalitarian and autocratic ideology of Nazism. Taylor believed that Hitler did not bring political innovation as his foreign policy was the same of his predecessors except some differences in emphasis: free Germany from the restrictions of Versailles peace treaty, restore German army and make Germany the greatest power in Europe. Taylor said The unique quality in Hitler was the gift of translating commonplace thoughts into actions The driving force in him was a terrifying literalism. Norman noticed that Taylor contradicted himself when he said that the differences between Hitlers foreign Policy and that of his predecessors were not just a matter of emphasis because he was a more radical all-powerful dictator: destroyed political freedom and the rule of law, transformed German economics and finance, abolished the individual German states and made Germany a united country. As Norman said, this author contradicts himself again when he defends that Hitler planned the annexation of Austria right after saying that he had no long-term plans. Norman refers the opinion of other historians based on the Mein Kampf (the description made by Hitler concerning his own future planes) and they believed that Hitler thoroughly planned the war that made him the most powerful leader in the world. The author of The Origins of the Second World War  defended that Hitlers main goal, as a chancellor, was the acquisition of Lebenesraum in Eastern Europe with the purpose of guarantee the security of all German people and so non-aryan people should be eliminated in order to maintain the purity of German blood. Norman noticed that later Taylor considers the desire of Lebenesraum or economic motives as consequences, instead of causes of Second World War. Other possible cause to this war was the feeling of superiority of Hitler, influenced by all German people that have the desire of conquest and extermination of the Slavs No German of political consequence thought of accepting the Slavs as equal and living at peace with them. Taylor also defends that the same or worst had happened if Germany had won the First World War. Taylor became a principal political bugbear since Second World War and he is not uncritical of the Soviet Union, he has only accepted that state’s assumption. â€Å"I had not the slightest illusion about the tyranny and brutality of Stalin’s regime†. In his memoirs said †But I had been convinced throughout the nineteen thirties that Soviet predominance in eastern Europe was the only alternative to German’s and I preferred the Soviet one. Moreover I believed that East European states, even when under Soviet control, would be preferable to what they had been between the wars, as has proved to be the case. Hence Soviet ascendency of eastern Europe had no perils for me,† and confessed that â€Å"he himself could not get it out of his head that Hitler was an indescribably wicked man. † After the approach to the Second World War, the book Taylor focuses on the comparison between Germany and United States from the latter power to be his new political target. However, with all the inconsistencies and contradictions presented in the book of Taylor, it generates the idea that Hitler advocated. Taylors book has generated huge controversy about the Nazi period, leading to many studies and many publications on the subject. So, today there is a plausible explanation for the occurrence of this phenomenon. With all the contradictions and inconsistencies of Taylors book, it becomes plausible accept the idea that he defended Hitler. So Norman disagrees with Taylor most of the times: He found many of his ideas ridiculous and prejudices downright shameful for an historian. As we can see, Norman quotes a small group of writers who seek to defend Hitler, representing him as a man of peace who sought only justice and equality for Germany. When Taylor describes one of these apologies as a â€Å"perfectly plausible book† Norman disagrees saying it is not. The â€Å"fundamental forces† and â€Å"continuity† schools are opposed to historians from a â€Å"discontinuity† school, which refused to accept that Hitler’s personality was product of German history or was justified by the attitudes of the previous leaders. They concede that other Germans and leaders were, even in the pass, anti-Semitic and Hitler was the action of Germans’ thoughts. The members of this school cannot avoid to think about how Germans accepted Hitler, how so many Germans were able to condone his bestial olicies and how so many were willing to put these policies into effect. The answer for this question, in this historians perspective, were close from â€Å"fundamental forces† that said that Nazi experience was a product of the German past, and said that it was necessary an unscrupulous man, like Hitler to deceive all Germany and lead to all of this catastrophic scenario. The functionalists argue that there was a primacy of domestic politics viewpoint in Germany and the decisions made were not rational, but a product of Germany crises. The intentionalists argue that there is a Primacy of foreign policy and all of these happens came because of Hitler’s personality and ideology. On the other hand, the â€Å"fundamental forces† and the â€Å"functionalists† didn’t believe in the importance and in the strong of Hitler’s personality and if there wasn’t any Hitler, probably someone else with the same character would make all the same. The author and Jackel agree over the point of Hitler’s policies and implementations. But Jackel and other historians disagree with one of Taylor’s most provocative points Hitler did not know what he was doing and he just takes the advantage of undeniable opportunities – refuting that in history, there was no other ruler like Hitler that wrote about his anti-Semitic and war conquest conviction, before take the power. Jackel already says that the controversy between â€Å"functionalists† and â€Å"intentionalists† doesn’t make sense, because they think that these two ideas are contradictory: that the decisions of the Third Reich were made by Hitler and that the regime worked as anarchy. But he doesn’t see contradiction here. According to Jackel, the governments of Weimar Republic wasn’t prepare for war like Hitler did and Germans support Hitler voluntarily and without terror and violence. He is against to all of schools of historical thoughts that are mentioned in this essay and the author is almost agreement with Jackel on the point that Hitler was not totally innocent or an â€Å"executor† of a longstanding tendency and it is dangerous to think that there is nothing that a man can do to escape to the history pass. The author also thinks that â€Å"fundamental forces† school of thought is not based on a solid historical pass because it doesn’t look at important facts and aspects of a nation pass. Norman Rich also makes a thesis that Germany pass produced the Third Reich which made Germany different from other modern societies and says that if there is anything that we could learn with this experiment is that all the beauty of a society is guaranteed â€Å"with traditions, institutions or national character† and must be carefully safeguarded. In our opinion, Normal Rich made a very interesting report and collected perspectives that are important to reflect. The other views that are exposed make us to think about Hitler and his purposes with other profundity. We think that Hitler was the producer and not the product and that he really influenced Germany, even with all historical pass and all Germans’ thoughts. However, all of these theses are well constructed and incredibly interesting.