Hitler’s individual development is inextricably bound from German social, political and economic life as a whole in the early 1900s. However, without the ripest social conditions along with an incredibly self-important and convincing personality could Hitler have ever risen to hold absolute national power. Antisemitism, one of Hitler’s beliefs that I assumed was just a product of his psychotic personality was actually a result of his experiences in Vienna. Prejudice against Jews had been a part of Austrian/German culture for a long while before Hitler came into any sort of power. Kershaw states that Vienna was one of the most anti-Jewish cities in Europe. Antisemites running rampant at the turn of the century, advocating: “punishing sexual relations between Jews and non-Jews as sodomy, and placing Jews under surveillance around Easter to prevent ritual child-murder” (65). Under this sort of discriminatory environment, along with his depressing stay in a men’s home, just a notch above homelessness, Hitler must have been in a vulnerable state, readily influenced by antisemitic arguments.
Whether or not Hitler claims in Mein Kampf that while living in Vienna he became an ideological antisemite, though there was little evidence of such during his time in WWI is irrelevant. Those little antisemitic seeds had to have been planted in Austria regardless of if he had acted out on them during the war. It would have been unwise for him to have enthusiastically preached antisemitism while actively serving in the military anyway, as some of his comrades and superiors were Jewish. Hitler observes that those leading the Social Democrat party (which he came to detest) were Jewish or “foreign” (61). He associated everything evil in the world with Judaism, perfect propaganda material.
Hitler notes that he greatly admired the mayor of Vienna, Karl Lueger, and the author Georg Schönerer, both avid supporters of Jewish discrimination. Schönerer offered the eugenic argument Hitler desired to rationalize his anti-Semitism, and Lueger demonstrated that anti-Semitism could be used as exploitative propaganda to bolster a political agenda.
I find it very interesting that none of Hitler’s beliefs were genuinely his own and only by the grand way in which he presented them did he gain any sort of attention. He was not even personable on a one-to-one basis. Kershaw sort of characterizes him during his early years as a self-important failure who was very passionate about his beliefs, ready to inform anyone as to why their countering beliefs were wrong. Certainly, those who lack passion, fanaticism, a public persona, and the ability to argue would not make very skillful dictators.
Lila points out some important ways the Adolf Hitler we have come to know became who he is.
ReplyDeleteIn her post, Lila mentions that Hitler’s individual development is “inextricably bound from German social, political and economic life as a whole,” and that “without the ripest social conditions along with an incredibly self-important and convincing personality...” Hitler would not have become the man in history whom we are studying about today. Lila’s use of the words “extricably bound” is significant. According to Blau and Duncan, the process of stratification begins at birth where statuses such as sex, race, geographical location and class are predetermined. Hitler’s ascribed stasuses determined his social location, resulting in his ‘world view’ and formed the person we come to know about now. Lila’s anthropomorphic analogy of Hitler’s “little antisemitic seeds” that “had to be planted in Austria regardless of if he had acted out on [the Jews] during the war” exemplifies the role of the process of stratification, which formed Hitler’s social context and ideas, and therefore his trajectory.
I also like how Lila pointed out that “none of Hitler’s beliefs were genuinely his own,” and “only by the grand way in which he presented them did he gain any sort of attention.” How this poor, uneducated man who is “not even personable on a one-to-one basis” managed to sway so many people is intriguing. This speaks a lot about the remarkability of the presentation of self. It clues us in on the relationship between the way one perceives himself and how he is perceived by society. As Lila elaborates, Hitler is characterized as “self-important” and “passionate about his beliefs, ready to inform anyone as to why their countering beliefs were wrong.” The impression that Hitler strongly considered his views as right and true, and that he conveyed his convictions in a confident and self-assured manner, could have been a strong influence on the way he presented himself and the way society viewed him. Inevitable symbolic interaction thus shaped Hitler’s rule, Germany (past and present) and the world.
Hitler definitely had the impression that he was an entitled man. When Kershaw discusses Hitler's childhood (specifically the years at his primary school), he describes how young Hitler was the ring leader in a lot of the games (war games were his favorite) and how he felt like a leader in that crowd. Due to the fact that his father was rarely home and that his mother was very submissive to him, Hitler thought of himself as the man of the house, which turned out to be the truth after his father died. Hitler didnt bother looking towards the future in a practical way because he thought he was entitled to have the life of a sophisticated artistic member of society. This is shown by the way he doesnt really make any money and frolics around Linz and Vienna attending operas and other activities of the sort. In short Hitler never thought of himself as an ordinary man. This feeling of self confidence and entitlement is one of the things that makes a strong leader. If you are confident and act it people will follow.
ReplyDeleteIn terms of the anti-semitism, this belief was prevalent throughout europe for many many years. There were of course hate crimes performed constantly. Living in Austria Hitler must have been surrounded by anti-semitism for his entire young life. It is definitely clear that Hitler became the spokesman for antisemitism and whenever someone thinks of the word, Hitler automatically comes to mind. But is a different thing to be antisemitic and to wipe out 6 million semites. So it very possible that Hitler grew more and more antisemitic from his time in Vienna, but I also believe that the hatred of the Jews was something he could unite a people by. Hitler did not plan on killing all of these people. His original plan was to send the entire Jewish population to the island of Madagascar. That obviously would not be cost affective. Hitler had to do something with the people he completely separated from society. It was Heinrich Himmler that came up with the final solution and since Hitler had been able to de-humanize the Jews in his mind he executed the general's plans.
I think a lot of the decisions that Hitler made were backed by political motives. The expulsion of the Jews started as a well executed use of a scapegoat and because Hitler was insane he took it to the level of wiping out the scapegoat, but he originally used the jews to get ahead in the political world. He knew he had the qualifications to be a leader, all he needed was the one enemy to unite his people against.
JCW's comment following on the post and Rebecca’s comment is interesting. It seems that we are beginning to develop an interest in focusing on the question of why and if Hitler intentionally used the Jews as the scapegoats in the search to unify the German people and to structure support for his regime.
ReplyDeleteAlthough many scholars have pointed out that anti-Semitism was long standing among many northern European countries and that the Nazi party, led perhaps by Hitler’s shared dislike of the Jewish people were staunch anti-Semites whose purpose it was to wipe out the Jewish population into anti-Semitic sentiment to fuel their goals, it is also argued that the sudden outpouring of anti-Semitism was by and large a tactic used to fuel the party’s goals and, because of the positive results in the eyes of the Nazi party regarding this propagandist tactic anti Semitism got out of hand. It is important to acknowledge that the final solution was not originally the centerpiece of Nazi policy.
Another thing to keep in consideration is that the Jews were not the only group sent to the camps. Intellectuals, communists and left wing thinkers, artists, musicians, disabled people, Gypsies, and homosexuals were all targeted. Right away we can see that anyone who appeared to be a threat to the regime or the perfect race in one way or another was put away. The Jews as a group were seen as being a threat due to their economic power, something that much of anti-Semitic rhetoric is based upon. Many pieces of early anti-Semitic propaganda focus on depicting the Jews as greedy moneylenders who have their hands in multiple pies and are conspiring to overtake the whole world. This fear is also a large factor in the widespread acceptance of anti-Semitism and the reason the Jews presented a threat to Hitler’s unified power.