“Fight on and fly on to the last drop of blood and the last drop of fuel, to the last beat of the heart,” said Manfred von Richthofen, a fighter pilot for the German Imperial Army in the early 1900s. Manfred’s patriotism and determination truly embodies the style of leadership presented by the rising German leaders in the early twentieth century, At the end of World War I, Germany was put into shame- disgraced and accused of instigating the “Great War.” But as new time came for Germany, many factors lead to the rejuvenation of the country’s people, perhaps caused mostly by Germany’s vigorous leadership, military sufficiency, and effective economy. These elements of Germany’s reinvigorated nation lead the country to become the strongest country preceding the outset of World War II.
As a result of Germany’s strong leaders, the country was able to take the world by storm and make it to the top. In 1938, TIME Magazine named Adolf Hitler their Man of the Year, declaring that “Herr Hitler reaped on that day at Munich the harvest of an audacious, defiant, ruthless foreign policy he had pursued for five and a half years.” It is to be understood by TIME’s perspective that Hitler was on top of the world; practically unstoppable. His unique foreign policy pushed the reversal of the Treaty of Versailles, the unity of everyone who spoke German, and the reinstatement of all lost German territories. As a result of Adolf Hitler acting upon his policy, “he had torn the Treaty of Versailles to shreds. He had rearmed Germany to the teeth— or as close to the teeth as he was able. He had stolen Austria before the eyes of a horrified and apparently impotent world” (TIME). Hitler had completely achieved the goals of his foreign policy. In addition, h...
... middle of paper ...
...oom boom, boom boom boom” (Baldrick). Baldrick’s rather straightforward representation of German warfare shows that the Germans really had a strong militrary presence during the early twentieth century.
In conclusion, Germany went from rock bottom all the way to the top on the world scale as the 1900s progressed, partially at the hand of factors proposed by Germany’s new leadership, effective military forces, and strong economy. In the past, Germany has been marked by disgrace, after being accused of allegedly provoking a war, embarrasment, after being horribly destroyed by other military forces in the early 1900s, and shame, after the Holocaust, but Germany will always be marked by the determination embodied by the leaders, and civilians, of the great nation in the early twentieth century when they went from a weak country, to the most powerful nation in the world.
Treitschke, Heinrich. “History of Germany in the Nineteenth Century and Historical and Political Writings.” The Human Record. By Alfred J. Andrea and James H. Overfield. Vol. 2. New York: Houghton Mifflin, 2011. 2 vols. 292-295.
During World War II, Germany’s military was superior to anyone else in the world, with far more advanced technology, tactics, and weaponry. They had a fearless leader who would stop at nothing to make his country great again. Their closest rival, the Soviet Union, was almost out of the picture with a death toll of over 26 million. On top of that, Germany had nothing to lose, and would not conceivably stop. So how then, with all odds against them, did the Allies win the war? A combination of factors affected Germany’s downfall, such as lack of morale, unwieldy weapons, and failure to work with its so-called allies.
After the First World War Germany recognised her first ever democratic government, the Weimar republic lasted from 1918 – 1933 an astonishingly long time given its turbulent start. The November revolution saw the election of soldier and worker councils similar to that of the Russian revolution in 1917, it spread across Germany like wildfire and in turn split the country before a democracy could even be instated nevertheless on November 9th 1918 the German republic was established. From then on The Weimar Republic was set on unstable and insecure path and this is why it is one of Germanys most important historical periods; it was Germanys earliest form of non-imperial government and rule and its collapse in 1933 paved the way for the rise of Hitler and the Nazi party. For these reasons there have been endless works published on the Weimar republic and the outpouring of literature post world war two focuses on the collapse of the Weimar republic and how the Nazi party came to power. However, to understand why the debate surrounding the Golden Era in the Weimar Republic is an interesting one and lacking in historical works, it is key to examine the historiography of the Weimar republic as a whole. Furthermore, to understand why historians focus on other periods in the Weimar’s history in particular the consequences of the treaty of Versailles and the consequences of the Wall Street crash in 1928 which led to its collapse.
However, when confronted with a strict policy of appeasement, by both the French and the English, the stage was set for a second World War. Taylor constructs a powerful and effective argument by expelling certain dogmas that painted Hitler as a madman, and by evaluating historical events as a body of actions and reactions, disagreeing with the common idea that the Axis had a specific program from the start. The book begins with the conclusion of the First World War, by exploring the idea that critical mistakes made then made a second war likely, yet not inevitable. Taylor points out that although Germany was defeated on the Western front, “Russia fell out of Europe and ceased to exist, for the time being, as a Great Power. The constellation of Europe was profoundly changed—and to Germany’s advantage.”
‘Germany’ (2003), Encyclopedia Britannica Online Reference Centre [online], Retrieved March 30, 2005 through MLC school intranet.
Centuries later and the name Adolf Hitler still rings volumes till this present day: discussed in history books, talked about amongst intellects and commoners alike, and despised by many for years to come. Upon hearing his name many may think of all the negative things Hitler has done, but few fail to analyze just how one man created such controversy amongst a nation without being stopped. The question then lies how does a man reign over country and devastate it for years to come? Adolf Hitler, a man who excelled in persuasion and charisma was able to reign over Germany for years. Born in Austria April 20th 1889, Hitler grew up with many hardships in his life.
'Nazi Germany ' represented the period from 1933s to 1945s, which played an important role in prosperous German history and the modern European history. After Germany participated in First World War in the first half of the 20th century, the whole society was glutted with unemployment, poverty, hunger, inflation and moral corruption. The public couldn’t feel the republican democracy benefits.
Hitler had a lot to do with Germany and he was remembered but not because of anything positive, but because he was one of the worst coldhearted dictators Germany or the world could’ve experienced. My view and Topic is worth consideration by the reader because it will inform them more about Hitler’s actions in 1933 and so on.
Williamson, D. G. Germany since 1815: A Nation Forged and Renewed. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005.
Fulbrook, Mary. A Concise History of Germany. 2nd ed. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press, 2004. Print.
The main purpose of the book was to emphasize how far fear of Hitler’s power, motivation to create a powerful Germany, and loyalty to the cause took Germany during the Third Reich. During the Third Reich, Germany was able to successfully conquer all of Eastern Europe and many parts of Western Europe, mainly by incentive. Because of the peoples’ desires and aspirations to succeed, civilians and soldiers alike were equally willing to sacrifice luxuries and accept harsh realities for the fate of their country. Without that driving force, the Germans would have given up on Hitler and Nazism, believing their plan of a powerful Germany...
Within Nazi government, Hitler acted as the final source of authority, which serves as evidence against the notion that Hitler was ‘weak’. Having consolidated power by 1934 Hitler was, at least theoretically, omnipotent, being Chancellor, Head of State and “supreme judge of the nation”. However, the notion that Nazi government systematically pursued the clear objectives of the Fuhrer is challenged by the reality of Nazi government structure. It has been widely accepted by historians that the Nazi State was a chaotic collection of rival power blocs. Mommsen’s explanation that this was the result of Hitler’s apathy towards government a...
Preliminary research into Otto von Bismarck and Bismarckian Germany’s portrayal in history reveal that from the 1870’s to 1920’s, Bismarck was portrayed favourably as the “man in charge” and as a necessity for Germany to advance its goals as a newly formed nation, a concept that could have its roots stemming from early nationalistic influences that arose during said period. This interpretation throughout the 1930 and 1940’s period changed dramatically as a result of Nazism and the Third Reich, where the Bismarckian narrative was heavily altered following the collapse of the Weimar Republic, as the Nazi regime constantly and consistently utilised the thus altered “Bismarck” to justify themselves. This is famously found in Hitler’s manipulation
Historians are often divided into categories in regard to dealing with Nazi Germany foreign policy and its relation to Hitler: 'intentionalist', and 'structuralist'. The intentionalist interpretation focuses on Hitler's own steerage of Nazi foreign policy in accordance with a clear, concise 'programme' planned long in advance. The 'structuralist' approach puts forth the idea that Hitler seized opportunities as they came, radicalizing the foreign policies of the Nazi regime in response. Structuralists reject the idea of a specific Hitlerian ideological 'programme', and instead argue for an emphasis on expansion no clear aims or objectives, and radicalized with the dynamism of the Nazi movement. With Nazi ideology and circumstances in Germany after World War I influencing Nazi foreign policy, the general goals this foreign policy prescribed to included revision of Versailles, the attainment of Lebensraum, or 'living space', and German racial domination. These foreign policy goals are seen through an examination of the actions the Nazi government took in response to events as they happened while in power, and also through Hitler's own ideology expressed in his writings such as Mein Kempf. This synthesis of ideology and social structure in Germany as the determinants of foreign policy therefore can be most appropriately approached by attributing Nazi foreign policy to a combination as both 'intentionalist' and 'structuralist' aims. Nazi foreign policy radicalized with their successes and was affected by Hitler pragmatically seizing opportunities to increase Nazi power, but also was based on early a consistent ideological programme espoused by Hitler from early on.
Following World War I, Germany found itself a crippled state with a nation of unsatisfied people, due largely to pre-war political conflict, domestic negligence during the War, and consequences of the Treaty of Versailles. For the next decade, Germany was burdened with many economic, social, and political woes. The nation had lost much of its land, including crucial mining regions, and its military was drastically reduced, marked by the demilitarization of the Rhineland. In addition to the crumbling of German pride after the War, the country was plagued by hyperinflation and unemployment. The people of the nation were beginning to lose faith not only in their government, but also in democracy itself.