NOTE: Free essay sample provided on this page should be used for references or sample purposes only. The sample essay is available to anyone, so any direct quoting without mentioning the source will be considered plagiarism by schools, colleges and universities that use plagiarism detection software. To get a completely brand-new, plagiarism-free essay, please use our essay writing service.
One click instant price quote
Question: Discuss Hitlers eventual gaining of Lebensraum. Was it mealy opportunistic or astutely planned? The argument that Hitlers objectives were to expand the Reich is one that cannot be argued against. In 1920 the German Workers Party changed its name to the National Socialist German Workers Party (or the Nazi party). It also published its manifesto; We demand... the revocation of peace treaties.
We demand land and territory to feed our people and settle our surplus population. Again 17 years in an address known as the Hossbach memorandum Hitler stressed his goal that gains in land mass must be made. There can be no argument that Hitler and the Nazis were primarily seeking land. Hitlers eventual gaining of land around Europe is a subject of ongoing debate. Did Hitler plan the expansion of the Reich or was this goal of his carried out by fortunate circumstances. It essential to concentrate on Hitlers own words to gain insight into this question.
This essay will focus on two reputable historians who have strong arguments for and against the question at hand. A J P Taylor presents an argument that Hitler... did not make plans- for world conquest or anything else. He assumed that others would provide opportunities and that he would seize them. H.
R. Trevor- Roper has put forth an aggressive critique on Taylors notable work The Origins of the Second World War that supports the opportunistic argument. Trevor - Roper dismissing his view as poorly researched and prematurely dismissing evidence that sways against his view. Although theses historians will be used to support the respective arguments personal research will make up the main structures, as there seems to be countless amounts of information that these historians have missed. The contemporary historic community seems fairly divided with a slight slant towards a more structuralist approach. In the later parts of the analyses the two fundamentals of the arguments will be presented with a personal conclusion drawn.
In 1920 the German Workers Party changed its name to the National Socialist German Workers Party (or the Nazi party). It also published its manifesto. Policies two and three portray particular relevance to the topic at hand. We demand... the revocation of the peace treaties.
We demand land and territory (colonies) to feed our people and to settle our surplus population. Hitler and the Nazis always had the premise objectives to expand German territory by principally demolishing the rearmament restrictions. For us it is a matter of expanding our living space in the East and making food supplies secure, and also solving the problem of the Baltic states. - May 1939, Adolf Hitler. For Germany to gain more land mass war was inevitable, preferably against the East. Of course the sixty year old debate still wages whether Hitlers goals were world domination or simply parts of europe he felt were rightfully his.
Hitler was aware of the inevitable war and a series of foreign policy's over six years began to lead and prepare Germany for war. The question arises and has been a subject of constant debate, whether these foreign policies where planned before hand or opportunistic? Two reputable historians have presented strong arguments for and against the statement. A J P Taylor presents an argument that Hitler did not make plans- for world conquest or anything else. He assumed that others would provide opportunities and that he would seize them. - A J P Taylor (The Origins of The Second World War). A J P Taylor takes an extremely one sided view on Hitler and his foreign policies.
H. R. Trevor- Roper is tipped to the other side of the spectrum, he puts forth an aggressive critique on Mr Taylors notable work dismissing his view as poorly researched and prematurely dismissing evidence that sways against his view. Mr Trevor- Roper presents an alternate argument to Mr Taylor that like Mr Taylor arises a strong argument. The contemporary historic community seems fairly divided with a slight slant towards a more structuralist approach. In the later parts of the analyses the two fundamentals of the arguments will be presented with a personal conclusion drawn.
In essence Mr Taylor has striped himself of all emotions towards the Germans, entering a plain of neutrality, where he feels by studying the raw documents and sources of the period he can best draw conclusions about the events that unfolded. It is in these documents and sources that his critics mostly draw fuel to attack his personal conclusions. Mr Taylors opportunist opinion arises from his assessment of Hitler as an individual. Hitler is presented by Mr Taylor as a man with objectives an a great deal of patience.
A leader who took advantage of a situation, seeking neither war nor a un rightful territory. This is in essence the character that the opportunist argument believes Hitler to be. Mr Taylor is of firm opinion that Hitler was not about global domination (and in some cases nor is the programme line) but wished the expansion or union of Smaller central European states such as Austria and Czechoslovakia. One of Mr Taylors strong factors in denouncing a blue print or programme for German expansion, is a discussion between Hitler and his senior advisors and commanders in on the 5 th of November 1937. The statements made by Hitler are known as the Hossbach memorandum named after the man who wrote it. Taylor speculates that this is suppose to contain Hitlers plans so hence the historical significance of the statements.
On the 5 th of November Hitler called a conference in the Chancellery. It is recorded that the participants were Neurath (the minister of war), Fritsch (the foreign minister), Rather (commander in chief of the Army) and the commander in chief of both the air force and navy. Hitler began discussing the need for Lebensraum (land or territory), particular areas were not specified but he stressed that particular gains had to be made. Hitler released as already discussed that forced would have to be used to acquire such territory.
The question remained how and when was this force going to be asserted? Hitler presented three different scenarios. One (1943 - 1945), Hitler proclaimed that 1943 was a year for action. Two, Civil war in France had began the time for action against the Czechs had come. - Hitler. Three, war between France and Italy occurred our objective must be to overthrow Czechoslovakia and Austria simultaneously - Hitler. The General way in which point one was quoted adds to support the non-planned scenario of Foreign policy.
Taylor states simplistically None of these cases came true; clearly therefore they do not provide the blue print for German policy - A J P Taylor The Origins of the Second World War pg 169. This point is the greatest factor in the argument that Hitler never created a blue print nor did one exist. In interpreting Taylors argument the second factor that Taylor really pushed towards his readers was the Czechoslovakian crises significance in proving again that no plan existed but more importantly Hitler merely used situations to his advantage the spark if you will was always there. Czechoslovakia consisted of numerous ethic minorities above all Germans (around three million). The Germans heard... the call of nationalism (- Taylor The Origins of the Second World War 190) and saw there united Germany growing powerful and united over there boarders.
It seems within the historical community the general consensus that the German- Czechs wished to join the German empire but also wished to stay in there homeland. Taylor believes strongly that Hitler didnt create this movement it merely grew stronger as Germany grew stronger. Hitler introduced foreign policies that in essence supported the leaders of the German faction in Czechoslovakia. He appointed a chain of leadership, and that they should create demands that are undeliverable to the Czech government. This almost immediately sprang politicians around the world into a frenzy, scenarios worked though, alliances re -evaluated. In the end of the twists and turns England and France tell Germany to demand more, which as Taylor describes it takes Hitler quite by surprise.
Taylor uses the Czech situation to portray Hitler as a leader which merely curves situations to his advantage rather then creating them. Again, seemingly arguing the opportunist line. Mr Taylor portrays a Hitler throughout his works that attempts to avoid conflict, a clever man who turns a constant until it meets his ideological objectives. Mr Taylor presents a very one-sided argument that although not in relevance to the question, an argument that seems to have embedded in its depth a humble sympathy for Hitler.
Covering this sympathy is a line of argument that is very persuasive towards Hitler having no blue print for global or European domination but more an intelligent man that grasped the opportunities presented to him. The programme or planned argument also presents a credited argument. Sifting through the people that support Hitler having a clear plan, the most notable and persuasive seems to be H. R.
Trevor-Roper. His argument is logical yet simply. In times Mr Taylor seems to be confused himself when writing but Mr Trevor-Roper is most coherent. The programme which Mr Trevor-Roper presents is one of Eastern Colonisation, entailing a war against Russia.
Hitlers aims were for Germany to be the superpower in Europe and if it was necessary have the ability to conquer the West as well. Hitler had to rebuild Germany to carry out these actions, both military and economy. Mr Trevor-Roper greatest criticism of Mr Taylors notable thesis is the way in which he dismisses Mein Kampf. Mr Trevor-Roper in line with the planned argument believes... those plans are mistakenly sta...
Free research essays on topics related to: socialist german workers, trevor roper, german workers party, foreign policies, peace treaties
Research essay sample on Socialist German Workers German Workers Party
