Kershaw, ‘‘Working Towards the Führer’ Flashcards
According to world-renowned Nazi German historian Ian Kershaw, what prompted these Nazi officials to carry out Hitler’s wish to rid the German Empire of its Jewish population through mass extermination on an industrial scale?
Hitler was a:
unifying- common denominator of the nazi party, activator of nazi party support and
enabler- giving support to those whose actions fell into the ideology of the Third Reich
Hitler served as a symbol of actionism and ideological radicalisation
The concept of “working towards the Führer” is highlighted as a key factor in understanding the actions of various individuals and groups within the Nazi regime. The term refers to the idea that individuals, whether party activists, military leaders, professionals, or bureaucrats, were indirectly or directly contributing to realising Hitler’s vision and goals.
Kershaw emphasizes the role of Hitler as the unifying, activating, and enabling force within the Third Reich. His charismatic authority and the vague, dynamic nature of his leadership claim served as a bond for various factions of the Nazi Movement and non-Nazi national-conservative elites. It also provided a common denominator for underlying consensus in Nazi policy. It offered a stimulus for action within different agencies of the regime, such as the SS, where initiatives in discrimination, repression, and persecution were carried out in Hitler’s name.
The collapse of rational structures of rule and the growth in autonomy of Hitler’s authority are highlighted as crucial factors in the radicalisation and dynamic of destruction within the Third Reich. Kershaw also points to the unrestrained nature of Hitler’s authority, which offered implicit backing and sanction to actions that furthered the aims of the Führer, including the removal of Jews from Germany.
Overall, Kershaw suggests that the actions of Nazi officials in carrying out mass extermination were driven by a combination of factors, including the charismatic authority of Hitler, the dynamic of destruction within the regime, and the willingness of individuals and groups to work towards the realisation of Hitler’s vision and goals.
What, according to Kershaw, is ‘charismatic authority’ and what role did it play in the radicalization of the Nazi-regime?
According to Kershaw, ‘charismatic authority’ is a form of leadership embodied in a charismatic leader, in this case, Adolf Hitler, that is based on a quasi-messianic personalized form of rule embodying national rebirth. This form of authority enabled Hitler to free himself from institutional constraints and legitimize the destructive dynamic intrinsic to the Nazi gamble for European hegemony through war. The ‘charismatic authority’ was the Third Reich’s unifier, activator, and enabler. It acted as a bond for warring factions of the Nazi Movement and non-Nazi national-conservative elites, provided a common denominator for an underlying consensus in Nazi policy, and offered the scope for new initiatives in a ceaseless dynamic of discrimination, repression, and persecution. It also gave implicit backing and sanction to those whose actions fell within the general ideological remit of furthering the aims of the Führer, leading to the collapse in civilised standards and the spiralling radicalisation of discrimination and persecution. Ultimately, ‘charismatic authority’ played a crucial role in the radicalization of the Nazi regime by providing a basis for an altogether new form of state and promoting the gradual realization of ideological aims.
Why was Hitler’s charismatic authority an enabler for systematic violence against the Jews?
Hitler’s charismatic authority played a crucial role in enabling systematic violence against the Jews for several reasons. Firstly, the concept of ‘charismatic authority’ allowed Hitler to free himself from institutional constraints and legitimize the destructive dynamic intrinsic to the Nazi gamble for European hegemony through war. This meant that Hitler’s personalized form of rule embodied the idea of national rebirth in the context of the collapse of the legitimation of the democratic Weimar, giving him the power to push for the radicalization and implementation of ideological lines closely associated with his broad aims.
Secondly, Hitler’s ‘charismatic’ model of domination, as opposed to bureaucratic rule, offered insights into the inexorable nature of the regime’s pursuit of its chimeric goal. The longer the regime lasted, the more boundless the destructiveness became, and the less it resembled a governmental system with the capacity to reproduce itself. This inherent instability of ‘charismatic authority’ was rooted in the Utopian vision of national redemption through racial purification, war, and conquest, which not only led to destructiveness but also self-destructiveness.
Additionally, Hitler’s charismatic authority served as a unifier, activator, and enabler in the Third Reich. It acted as a bond for warring factions of the Nazi Movement and non-Nazi national-conservative elites, offering the main prop of popular support for the regime and providing implicit backing and sanction to those whose actions fell within the ideological remit of furthering the aims of the Führer.
Furthermore, the ‘charismatic’ model of domination dissolved any framework of ‘rational’ government and stimulated the radicalization largely brought about by others, without Hitler’s clear direction. This allowed for the unstoppable radicalization of the ‘system’ and the gradual emergence of policy objectives closely related to Hitler’s ideological imperatives.
In conclusion, Hitler’s charismatic authority enabled systematic violence against the Jews by legitimizing the destructive dynamic intrinsic to the Nazi regime, providing a unifying force for various factions, and stimulating radicalization without clear direction. This, in turn, allowed for the pursuit of ideological aims closely associated with Hitler’s vision, ultimately leading to the implementation of systematic violence against the Jews.
In which school can we position Kershaw? Use examples from the text to support your answer.
Functionalism- Emerged a little bit later and has been the most popular approach after intentionalism
Central idea that the Holocaust developed over time without any clear line of thought or policy, but the consequence of possibilities ended and circumstances that emerged
Often linked to the radicalization of the Third Reich (see Kershaw) and the political organization of Nazi Germany, thus also known as the structuralist interpretation of the Holocaust
The text discusses the gradual disintegration of rational government and administration structures, the proliferation of chaotic agencies, and the undermining of ordered government. It also emphasizes Hitler’s non-interventionist approach to government administration, sporadic and delphic directives, and aloofness from state bureaucracy. This suggests that the collapse of rational structures of the rule was not necessarily a deliberate policy of destabilization by Hitler but rather a consequence of his non-bureaucratic leadership style. Therefore, the interpretation presented in the uploaded material aligns more closely with the functionalist perspective, which emphasizes the role of broader societal and structural factors in the radicalization of the Nazi regime, rather than intentionalism, which focuses on Hitler’s deliberate and central role in orchestrating the radicalization.
