"Hitler's twin ideological obsessions, it is
universally recognized, were Lebenstraum
and anti-Semitism" (229). Creating a larger "living space" and
conquering new lands, particularly in the East, was one of the main goals for
Hitler during his reign. Support for Hitler grew through his policy of foreign
expansion. However, the German leader was very cautious in discussing the
"Jewish Question" in speeches, especially when it came to the middle
class. While he was anti-Semitic, the mention of such hatred was still
considered taboo and unpopular in 1938. Hitler was very concerned about his
image and only interested in rallying mass support, because the belief from
followers and more directly, the belief from his disciples, were the main
things that fueled Hitler. It is clear that Hitler was very decisive and
tactical when it came to approaching the public. He only touched on issues that
would make him a popular and supported leader, not necessarily preaching topics
he was interested in. "Hitler's
image was not dominated by his obsession with the 'Jewish Question'"
(233). The dictator even made sure to distance himself from the increasingly unpopular
Nazi mobs (who stole and beat people up) by siding with legality. It is
interesting to note that the people of Germany also made this distinction in
their minds. The Nazi Party and Adolf Hitler were two different entities. A
German stated that while the "Little Hitlers" ran amuck creating
destruction on the streets, Hitler would never do that because he was
"good" and he probably did not know what his disciples were doing.
Hitler gained the trust and respect of people that they worshipped him as a god
and believed that he could do no wrong. Public image was extremely important in
maintaining and gathering support for Hitler.
Hitler's popularity began to decline when World War II
commenced. In early 1939 he declared that a new world war would lead to the
destruction of the Jewish race in Europe. With the invasion of Poland in
September, and Britain and France declaring war on Germany, feelings of unity and conquer
swept the German nation. However, as days and weeks and months passed, familiar
feelings of anger arose in Germans. They were in yet another war, and it was
due to their ruler. Resentment brewed and Hitler's popular image became
tarnished. Instead of bringing the German people together, people began to lose
faith in their once spirited ruler. "The Fuhrer has it easy. He doesn't
have to look after a family. If the worst comes to the worst in the war, he'll
leave us all in the mess and put a bullet through his head" (200). Hitler
knew that he was becoming more and more disliked. Was this the reason he
started creating the Jewish Ghettos? This was one way he could isolate the
so-called "rats" of Europe so that the German race could remain
"pure." More than just isolation, it was the first step to
extermination. Did Hitler want to rally mass support for him again through
anti-Semitism? How did the unpopular topic of the "Jewish Question"
turn into favorable genocide? Where was the transition?
Heroic Myth
ReplyDeleteDuring an event tonight at the New-York Historical Society, I heard some comments by several historians on some of what constituted the life of a successful and revered American mythical icon. Without blaspheming George Washington, the tallest figure in our pantheon of American heroes and national myths, I will say a few comparative things to point to some qualities that Hitler lacked that perhaps would have made a difference both in the fighting of WWII and in the perpetuation of the Hitler myth.
One of the historians said Washington "cultivated an enigmatic persona," distancing himself from acrimonious debate among his lieutenants and keeping all but a very select few at arm's length. This sounds a lot like Hitler, who kept demand for his presence high by mostly refusing it. The difference is in Hitler lacking the ability to manage resources, people, even the military or the nation effectively, something any successful and enduring leader must have. Had Hitler been a better manager and the cutthroat competition between his subordinates not existed, the war could have gone differently.
A leader's greatest skill must be judgment, and Hitler had a poor sense of it. He came to conclusions unilaterally and passionately despite what advisers might have told him or what reality dictated. But what Hitler truly lacked was discipline, which is necessary for good judgment. For someone who prided himself on his military experience and paraded around wearing his Iron Cross, he had no personal discipline and could not control his emotions. Washington is the opposite of this, constantly fighting to control his anger and showing that self-mastery is the first step to gaining control over anything else.
Where Hitler falls extremely short is his lack of the "gift of silence." Washington presided over meetings straight-faced and silent while letting his Cabinet or his generals work out their positions whereas I imagine Nazi conference meetings consisted mostly of Hitler shouting at his subordinates with pointed fingers and declaring vaguely and enthusiastically what must be.
In the end, the Hitler myth suffered along with the German boys Hitler would not let retreat from Stalingrad and throughout the Russian Front. I think he might have brought his popularity roaring back by offering to abdicate power. The moment Washington cemented his stature is when he refused the crown of the United States of America, in contrast to the totalitarian leaders of the twentieth century--men like Mao Zedong, Stalin, Castro, Tito, and Hitler.
Knowing the German people's connection to him was impossible to break by the time the tide of the war turned, that they had come to believe that Germany was Hitler and Hitler was Germany, his offer to leave the Fuhrership to someone else would have regained him some trust. The German public was well aware of the flaws of the top men like Goring and Himmler; the prospect of power being turned over to a lesser figure like that would have pushed the public back into supporting Hitler like they had in earlier years.
This, of course, is the fundamental difference. The thought would never have entered Hitler's mind. The idea of ceding an iota of power in unlike Hitler in the extreme. Hitler was a fundamentally flawed man and leader before he came a mythic figure, and his own failings brought him down from mythic stature.