Was Nazi Germany a totalitarian state?

I have quite strong views on this; I would argue that it infact wasn't, especially at the start, I think it became more totalitarian.

Qualities synonymous with totalitarianism: 1 leader, central collective forum for decision making, one strong ideology, employment of smothering terror and the regime not caring what people thought, complete all-encompassing control, monpolization of society's resources, monopoly on violence, a definite hierarchy, total conformity, fascism...the list could go on.

The common model of totalitarianism within Nazi Germany can be criticised on 2 distinct levels:

1. The Nazis did not have a complete command control over the economy (and typically, in a totalitarian state this would not be the case).

2. Government did not have the organisation OR unity of purpose to dominate affairs.

I believe that the Third Reich gradually became more totalitarian, especially by 1938 when the power of the Wehrmarcht was significantly reduced - removal of opposition and in 1938 the role of big business and industry was also reduced with the Ministry of Finance and Economics (Goering and Todt taking control over the economy).

Question is, was Hitler concerned with creating a totalitarian regime?

IMO - No. Hitler wanted full control and full conformity, but totalitarianism didn't necessarily work for his aims.

In totalitarianism there tends to be mass oppression of vast sections of society, not just the minority - for example, under Stalin everyone was at risk, terror was terror for terros sake (not the case in Nazi Germany). In totalitarianism, people are forced into cooperating with governments out of fear. Although this is evident in Nazi Germany, much is questionable and it is difficult to substantiate. Hitler wanted passion, richness and inspiration for his Master Race all organically working together under one philosophy in one united Volksgemeinschaft or "Peoples's Community".

In a totalitarian state, there would be a central collective forum for decision making, despite it being controlled by 1 leader (totalitarianism usually very structured and organised) - this wasn't the case in Nazi Germany.

I would conclude that Nazi Germany was a polycratic dictatorship with significant totalitarian leanings. It started off as a polycratic dictatorship but by 1945 it culminated in terror for terrors sake.

A gradual process of becoming more totalitarian - 1938 - removal of opposition from the Wehrmarcht etc.

So Nazi Germany wasn't totalitarian in a classic way as suggested by liberal Western historians and historians working in the pre-Gorbachev era.

Richard Overy argues that we need to imagine Nazi Germany as it was, put it into its historical context rather than judge it against a checklist of features synonymous with totalitarinism.

In conclusion, Nazism was very unique in it's style of government, quite conceivably like nothing before it (although Overy would argue that features of polycracy and dualism were evident in Roosevelt's New Deal USA with the alphabet agencies).

______

The above was probably totally incoherent.

So, what do others think...was Nazi Germany totalitarian?

Btw don't move this to D&D, it is designed to promote A2 exam discussion!

Reply 1

madjackie

Big up to the Beverley massive! lol!! ahem. yes sorry i'll behave now :smile:

I think i pretty much agree with the whole totalitarian discussion of the thread. But I think in some respects the regime was quite totalitarian- for example institutions typically free from the states control became nazified. I refer particuarly to the arts and the churches, which were typically outlets for free expression of faith, belief, ideas etc. The burning of books and the banning of art etc
It could be argued in some respects, as with most aspects of Nazi government that perhaps image was more important than reality. Although we now have evidence with the benefit of hindsight that strongly suggests a disorganised polycratic political chaos you must consider how the people viewed the regime at the time.
With the high levels of propaganda and indoctrination etc would it be right to argue that perhaps people felt they were living under a totalitarian govt? Indeed on another level was the existence of such saturating propaganda and the existence of films like the eternal jew and the Hitler Youth movement indicative of a totalitarian regime? Compulsory attendance to the Hitler youth again points towards the totalitarian aspect of controlling all areas of life.
An example of how fiction can rule over fact comes particuarly from the terror state. Although there were only small numbers of officials etc workin in the Gestapo people lived in constant fear due to denunciations. In this respect although the regime was highly flawed the perception of an all encompassing terror state was almost as affective and damaging as if it were actively and efficently in place.
As people like to say Sometimes it isnt the truth but what people believed to be the truth we must concern ourselves with in historical study.
The fact a secret police existed at all and acted to supress overt dissatisfaction with the regime hints at totalitarianism.
I do agree with what you've said, just trying to balance it out a bit :biggrin:

Muchly Love
xxx

Latest

Trending

Articles for you

Personal Statement:Philosophy 11

Personal Statement - International Relations 3

Personal Statement - History 12

Personal Statement - History

How The Student Room is moderated

To keep The Student Room safe for everyone, we moderate posts that are added to the site.

Try out the app

Continue on web