How Convincing Is the Argument That Hitler Was a 'Weak Dictator'

3066 Words13 Pages
How convincing is the argument that Hitler was a "weak dictator?" According to Allen Todd, a ‘dictatorship is the general term used to describe a political regime in which democracy; liberal individuals rights and genuine parliamentary rule are absent. A dictatorship is a result of a mass movement or revolution that is committed to a radical ideology and program of political, economic and social change’. It can be argued that Hitler’s Nazi regime had a totalitarian nature in that it possessed some of the central foundations of a totalitarian dictatorship. These aspects that were the foundations in Hitler’s dictatorship were: a distinctive ‘utopian’ all embracing ideology which includes the conception of the Aryan race and the ‘kinder küche kirche’ program for German woman which both dominates and attempts to restructure all aspects of society, a political system headed by an all powerful leader which was Hitler; in which a cult of personality is created, party, parliament (Reichstag) and the state are under the control of the leader, the use of censorship and propaganda ( Josef Goebbles) aimed at controlling all aspects of culture and indoctrination of all sections of society especially the young ( Hitler youth). There is also a systematic use of coercion and terror through organizations such as Hitler’s SS ( Schutzstaffel), Gestapo and the SA (Sturmabteiling) in order to ensure total compliance and finally all decisions are made by the leader and the regime. Although Hitler’s dictatorship had all the central foundations of a totalitarian dictatorship in place, it can be argued that he himself was a weak dictator. At the time it seemed like a lot of the Nazi propaganda made was devoted to portraying the regime as a smooth state, with a hierarchy of power culminating in the illustration of the Fuhrer at its peak, Hitler as the strong leader above the
Open Document