Self interest is often pursued without regard to others and therefore overrides principles. This argument is illustrated by the life of Albert Speer, as his constant striving for self-gain trumps any key ideological belief. This is evident in Speer’s joining of the Nazi Party, his work for the Nazi Party both as an architect and a reichsminister, and finally in his life following the war both during the Nuremberg Trials and after Spandau.
Albert Speer only joined the Nazi Party out of pure curiosity, rather than any ideological motive. When Speer first saw Hitler, it was at the university he was working as an assistant-professor at and, he became enamored with him. This was perhaps due to the lecture style presentation of Hitler’s speech,
…show more content…
or as Speer commented: the ability for Hitler to transform the crowd into a homogenous mob, feeding their hopes, and feeding off their desires (Speer, 1969). Speer soon joined the party and subsequently became involved in building projects under Karl Hanke. The impact of the Great Depression in 1929 left Germany's economy in a state of ruin. This was due to the structural problems of the Weimar Republic and its reliance on foreign loans to prop up the economy in the 1920’s. This spelt disaster for Speer’s career, as his salary was cut and his prospects for architectural jobs was minimal. Due to this, work under the Nazi party meant a breath of life into his career, presenting Speer with the opportunity to do what he loved and make a lot of money doing so. Speer himself called the work he did under Karl Hanke as the single greatest turning point in his life (Speer, 1969). Therefore, Speer did not join the Nazi party out of an ideological call to arms but a fascination with Hitler. Moreover, he continued to work for the Nazi party because it presented an opportunity to gain power and wealth. Albert Speer’s later career as the Minister of Armaments displays how he simply acted out of a desire to gain power. In February 1942, after Speer’s predecessor died, Hitler promptly appointed Speer as the new Minister of Armaments. However, Speer was not happy with a simple appointment, as Goering also desired this role, and persuaded Hitler to issue it as a command. Evidently, Speer worked out of a desire to secure his position, and this consolidation of power continued as he got rid of party members from his ministry and replaced them with professionals. This comes into sharp juxtaposition with other members of Hitler’s inner circle, where diminishing party influence within their respective ministries was unseen. This displays how Speer was more concerned about himself and his work, then any party ideology. This only continued as the war dragged on, as Speer became more entrenched in his work. Speer speaks of a “narcotic frenzy of work” (Speer, 1975) when describing his life in the lead up to the end of the war, which further drives the idea that he was working hard not out of a unwavering belief in Nazi ideology but rather for his own sake. This idea is supported by Joachim Fest, who argues that the ideological obsessions that drove the other high ranking officers were completely alien to Speer (Fest, 2003). While historians such as Alan Bullock maintains that Speer was a mere technocrat, neither driven by ideology or a desire to gain power, Speer’s career as Minister of Armaments and subsequently the Nuremberg Trials and life after Spandau, paint a very different story. Finally, Speer’s self serving intentions come into full spotlight during the Nuremberg Trials and in his life and writing after his release from Spandau.
At the beginning Speer was held separately and he depicted himself as a technocrat who was willing to give information to his captors regarding German weapons and economic performance. Speer was not only forthcoming with information, but he also was the first to step forward, pleading a collective guilt and responsibility for the crimes committed by the Third Reich. Similar to his consolidation of power, this move is very different to the actions of Goering, who was the other member of Hitler’s inner circle who was on trial. While Goering, an ideologue who defended Hitler, and Nazi Germany’s war policy rather than admitting the criminality of his and the entire actions of the entire nation. This displays Speer’s realization of his only chance of survival, showing how he was not ruled by ideology like Goering but only out of self interest. This is further seen in his life following his release from Spandau, where he carefully creates the image of himself as the ‘Good Nazi’ through his writings. One of the constant themes within his writing is his claimed ignorance towards the systematic killing of Jews. One piece of historical evidence used by many historians such as Erich Goldhagen (Goldhagen, 1971) is Speer’s attendance at the Posen Conference, where Heinrich Himmler gave an explicit speech on the extermination of Europe’s Jews, where Speer is even mentioned. However, Speer continually denied that he was there at that time, claiming he left the conference prior to Speech. One of the leading historians on Speer, Gitta Sereny maintains that whether he was there or not, it was impossible for Speer to not know about this key Nazi policy (Sereny, 1995). This denial on the part of Speer displays how he cared simply about himself. Therefore, Speer did not work out of the machinations of an overarching ideology, showing
how self interest overrides principle.
Kershaw later depicts a comment made by Hitler discussing the dire need to deport German Jews, away from the ‘Procterate,’ calling them “dangerous ‘fifth columnists’” that threatened the integrity of Germany. In 1941, Hitler discusses, more fervently his anger towards the Jews, claiming them to responsible for the deaths caused by the First World War: “this criminal race has the two million dead of the World War on its conscience…don’t anyone tell me we can’t send them into the marshes (Morast)!” (Kershaw 30). These recorded comments illustrate the deep rooted hatred and resentment Hitler held for the Jewish population that proved ultimately dangerous. Though these anti-Semitic remarks and beliefs existed among the entirety of the Nazi Political party, it didn’t become a nationwide prejudice until Hitler established such ideologies through the use of oral performance and
Speer’s well structured and thought out defence shaped historical interpretation for years to come. At Nuremberg he presented himself as a pure technician and not involved in the politics or ideology of the party. He also claimed collective responsibility for crimes against Jews but also his ignorance of the Nazi intentions. As he stated at a later time: “I just stood aside and said to myself that as long as I did not personally participate it had nothing to do with me. My toleration for the anti Semitic campaign made me responsible for it.” This admission of guilt won a fair amount of sympathy from the court. The reasons he gave for being with the Nazi party was that he was taken by Hitler’s personality and also realised that if he was to achieve his dream as an architect he will have to sell his soul to the party. This image of Speer was to be accepted for a while by most historians and was given little attention. This was probably because Speer was a little less ‘spectacular’ than Hitler’s other henchmen. There were however some suspicions. John Galbraith, a member of the US team that debriefed Speer before the Nuremberg trial, said in Life magazine 1945 that Speer’s claims contained “elements of fantasy”. He also believed that Speer’s confession was a part of his “well developed strategy of self vindication and survival.”
I think he felt that if he got your forgiveness then he could die in peace for all the bad he had done. A lot of Jewish people had died due to what Hitler ordered everyone in Germany army to do. Albert Speer was a high-ranking Nazi member and he was also Hitler’s minister and even though he knew he was going to jail no matter what was said at the Nuremberg trials he had confessed to all the things he had done. According to Speer “My moral guilt is not subject to the statute of limitations, it cannot be erased in my lifetime” (245). In making this comment, Speer knew that even though he was punished with twenty years of imprisonment that they only punished his legal guilt. Speer was haunted by the things he had done and he knew that he did not deserve anyone’s forgiveness. Even Speer, Hitler’s minister, knew that no one in the German army deserved anyone’s sympathy or
Nevertheless, he was avidly opposed to the war guilt clause that was encapsulated in the Treaty of Versailles, a view similarly held by the Nazi Party. After the memorisation of hearing Hitler speak at a student rally in 1930, he applied to join the Nazi Party, and on 1st March 1931, Speer became its 474 481st member. At this time Speer played little part in party affairs, but joined some small subsidiary Nazi organisations, including the NSKK (motor club). It was however, his involvement in the Nazi Party that gave him employment throughout the difficult depression years, after Speer failed in establishing a private archi... ... middle of paper ... ...
]Haffner, is a book which is hard to define. Only 165 pages long, Haffner has crammed more relevant information into this book than many twice its length. He observes Hitler's roller coaster ride through life and the country that he eventually took along. From Hitler's private life to the complete betrayal of Germany, Haffner evaluates the conditions and impetus for Hitler's accomplishments and failures. These include not only Hitler's psyche, but also the political arena of post World War I Europe.
Society teaches that everyone is equal; however, between 1933 and 1945, the Nazi party deemed Jews inferior. Some people agreed with the party, other silently rebelled. Either way, in 12 years around 6 million Jews were systematically murdered. One person who silently rebelled was Hans Huberman. In “The Book Thief” by Markus Zusak, Hans Huberman’s compassionate actions and beliefs are influenced by the Nazi party’s treatment of Jews.
On the other hand, she considered the trial required the concentration on the actions in which Eichmann committed, acts that incorporated the genocidal policy creation. Eichmann himself characterizes his involvement as he, primarily, was ignorant of his criminality. In actual fact, consistent with Eichmann, he supposed he was innocent, in the condemnation sense (Arendt 220). Eichmann supposed the orders of Hitler were law. A. "On Following Orders in an Unjust War.
In Candide, by Voltaire, Candide struggles through a world torn by constant bloodshed and crime. As he travels, he and other characters are deceived, injured, and abused by the world around him. Voltaire’s Candide reveals another side of human beings’ hearts as he portrays humanity’s hamartias as greed, lust, and religion.
...ibution to the Nazi party. Joseph’s theory of Speer was that he the ability to get himself saved from the death penalty. Joseph states that Speer realized that he could not defend his action as the ‘armaments chief’ and so decided to use his actions in the last few months of the war at reasons for reducing his sentence.
Albert Speer epitomizes an individual who used an event to his advantage. Therefore, the statement is inaccurate in relation to Albert Speer. Speer used his relationships in the Nazi Party and relationship with Hitler to establish his career. He abused his authority as the Armaments Minister to advance his political position. Additionally, he lied at his Nuremberg Trials to prevent himself from receiving the death penalty.
After the loss of the second World War, Speer, along with twenty other surviving members of Nazi leaders were arrested on May 23rd 1945 by the Allies. Speer was later informed on September, 1945 that he would be charge for crimes against humanity and war crimes and awaited trial at Nuremberg. After his trial, Speer was later found guilty and sentenced to 20 years imprisonment at Spandau prison in Nuremberg. During Speer’s imprisonment, although against orders, he began writing memoirs and letters that would later become the basis for his books ‘Inside the Third Reich’ and ‘Spandau: The Secret Diaries’. After serving his full 20 year sentence, Speer was discharged in 1966. As of being released there were many publishing offers for his memoirs.
If you are interested in architecture, you might want to read about Albert Speer. He was Hitler's main architect. Hitler ordered him to rebuild Berlin into Germania. Germania was going to be the new capital. In 1945 when the Nazi Party fell the plans were over. The war was over and Hitler had killed himself. In 1945 Speer told people he was going to kill Hitler. My opinion of Albert Speer was that he was a good nazi. when in trial for crimes he did and didn't comity he apologized for the nazis rude and illegal way of handling the jews. Albert Speer was a good nazi because he rebuilt Berlin like hitler had asked him to.
Born on the 9th of March 1905 and died on the 1st of September 1981, Albert Speer was the Chief Architect for the Nazi Party from 1933 to 1941. Hitler admired Speer’s architectural works due to the large usage of the Nazi’s National symbol; the Swastika which was conveyed as a symbol of “pain” at the time.
Adolf Hitler (the Führer or leader of the Nazi party) “believed that a person's characteristics, attitudes, abilities, and behavior were determined by his or her so-called racial make-up.” He thought that those “inherited characteristics (did not only affect) outward appearance and physical structure”, but also determined a person’s physical, emotional/social, and mental state. Besides these ideas, the Nazi’s believed tha...
Adolf Hitler joined a small political party in 1919 and rose to leadership through his emotional and captivating speeches. He encouraged national pride, militarism, and a commitment to the Volk and a racially "pure" Germany. Hitler condemned the Jews, exploiting anti-Semitic feelings that had prevailed in Europe for centuries. He changed the name of the party to the National Socialist German Workers' Party, called for short, the Nazi Party. By the end of 1920, the Nazi Party had about 3,000 members. A year later Hitler became its official leader Führer. From this, we can see his potential of being a leader and his development in his propaganda.