Hitler Speech

Hitler was not suited to be the leader of Germany 

It has once been said that the necessary qualities one must have to seize power are not the same as those needed to rule wisely afterwards. (Rochefort, J. 2002) Good morning Ms Hotchins and fellow classmates. Adolph Hitler was a man whose ascent to and tenure of power in Nazi Germany was indicative of this statement. For while his political prowess and oratory skills enthralled the German nation, as a leader, he was as Rochefort puts it; ill suited for someone who had to fill the position of commander in chief. (Rochefort, J. 2002) It is for this reason that it can be argued that Adolph Hitler was not suited to rule Germany. For, eventually the entire German war effort was centred around a man who as Irving summarised; easily lost his composure and was prone to angry outbursts and ill-considered decisions in consequence. (Irving, D. 2002) This hypothesis can be put forward based on Hitler’s medical conditions, lack of delegation ability with his subordinates, his inflexible battle contingency plans and finally his inefficient economic policies. 

Adolph Hitler was stricken with a medical condition which rendered him unfit and incapable of leading Nazi Germany. As Reader’s Digest stated; by the beginning of 1942 there had been signs… the Fuhrer was suffering from progressive syphilitic paralysis. (Reader’s Digest 1963, p.623) An individual suffering from a mental illness is simply incapable of managing a nation, and yet even Hitler recognised his affliction back in 1925, transcribing in Mein Kampf: For many years an… infection has been attacking the public health of the people… syphilis. (Hitler, A. 1925) This source is particularly important as it gives an indication of Hitler’s unbalanced mind from his own perspective, offering valuable and unbiased insight into the man. Nevertheless it was not until 1942 that Hitler was officially diagnosed with the mental condition by his private physician Morell, whose report was circulated amongst the more senior Nazi officials, including the Reichfuhrer Himmler and his doctor Kersten, who immediately advised Himmler to depose Hitler. Here they are on the above powerpoint. As Kersten wrote in his memoirs: The Reichsfuhrer was... allowing decisions which determined the fates of millions of men to be obeyed as if they were conceived by a normal brain, when in fact they came from a man suffering from a terrible mental illness (Kimel, A. 2005) As the war gradually turned against Germany, Hitler’s medical condition continued to deteriorate, to the point where Speer, his armament minister wrote: I was constantly tempted to pity him… he continued to commit nonexistent divisions… [and] frequently took flight from reality and entered his world of fantasy. (Kimel, A. 2005) Although at this point it could be argued that since the Fuehrer was receiving medical treatment for his condition, he was entitled to retain his position as head of state, this is not the case. How can a person be trusted to govern over a nation while their mind is ravaged by a terrible mental illness? For as Himmler’s doctor Kersten summed up: Only a man in complete possession of his faculties had the right to rule. (Kimel, A. 2005) Hitler had undoubtedly forfeited that right, his mental health declining to the point where he was unfit to look after himself, let alone a nation. His decisions in command from that point forward, were the death throes of a madman and reflective of his mind’s inner battle. 

Hitler’s insistence to maintain control of German armed forces despite his obvious inexperience marked him as an arrogant and incompetent leader. He would have been best advised to have simply left the management of the German military to the professionals. Instead, Hitler’s ineptitude in command and his inability to delegate the roles of his subordinates according to their abilities became exposed on numerous occasions. General Halder, one of Hitler’s generals recorded in his diary: Hitler’s idea of ‘conducting operations’ is to follow neurotic reactions based on momentary impressions and to show a total inability to appreciate the apparatus of command. (Bodine, R. 2002) This statement is interesting, as it reflects on Hitler’s leadership capabilities. However it must be kept in mind that this general was obviously irked at Hitler’s insistence to bypass the military chain of command, and so there would undoubtedly be some bias in his description towards the Fuhrer. Nevertheless, General Halder was by no means alone in his discontent with the chain of command. Field Marshal von Manstein verified how Hitler would procrastinate every time it was urgently necessary for us to commit forces to battle in time to forestall an operational success by the enemy or to prevent its exploitation. (Braunbeck, A. 1997) These sources show how Hitler’s inability to delegate his subordinates to their official roles was a crucial factor in his mismanagement of the country. He refused to accept advice from even his generals during the war, his weakness being his inability to accept criticism and take the advice offered to him by his military experts. For, as Braunbeck stated: if anyone dared challenge Hitler’s decision or judgment, he would become very angry and at times break into a rage (Braunbeck, A. 1997) It was Hitler’s continual decision to maintain control of all aspects of the military, an area that he was not even qualified to lead. This shows how truly inept he was as a leader. Nevertheless, there were those amongst his staff who still described him as the greatest general of all time, (Bodine, R. 2002) and he claimed he was qualified to lead the German military due to his experience as a soldier in the Great War, where he rose to the rank of Corporal. However, Hitler had never gained any experience commanding a military unit in times of war, and so was unfamiliar with the methods and techniques required. Hitler’s pride simply dictated his military policy of exclusion, to the point where his qualified generals lost their say in how the war was fought. Hitler’s inability to delegate undoubtedly cost him the war and provides further evidence of his failure as a leader. 

Hitler’s tactics during the war led to unparalleled loss of life, indicating his incompetence as a leader and his inability to admit defeat. His leadership choices led to insurmountable German casualties, further exacerbated by his refusal to allow his troops to retreat and create a contingency plan. You can see by the numbers of German casualties on the graph behind me. (Appendix A) At one point in Russia, with the German army beleaguered by overwhelming enemy forces, a general requested they retreat, to which Hitler replied Get yourself back to Germany as rapidly as you can – but leave the army in my charge. And the army is staying at the front. (Irving, D. 2002) Hitler’s arrogance marked him as an unfit military leader, as he would rather see his armies utterly annihilated then disgrace him with retreat. On another occasion, when a new general requested Hitler allow him to retreat, Hitler told him: In this situation there is only one answer, and that is not to yield one inch – to plug the gaps and hold on. (Irving, D. 2002) Although it has been argued that at times this strategy by Hitler was beneficial to the army, and prevented a rout occurring, in truth it was Hitler’s arrogance and misguided sense of honour that saw him commit his troops to the finish. He believed that: In a situation like this, any sign of defeatism is open treachery. (Irving, D. 2002) However it is not the mark of a person fit to rule a modern nation who condemns his soldiers to vain suicide missions in a conceited attempt to preserve any dignity from his mistakes. Perhaps had Hitler exhibited less pride then Nazi Germany would have never fallen, reinforced by the survivors of his failed endeavours in the East. Instead he criminally forced his soldiers to continue fighting in hostile territory, to his orders: Every leader, down to squad leader must be convinced of his sacred duty to stand fast come what may even if the enemy outflanks him. (Braunbeck, A. 1997) Hitler’s callous indifference towards the lives of his solders is indicative of the nature of this man, and clearly illustrates his inability to plan and lead a nation. 

Adolph Hitler’s rampant mismanagement of the German economy stands testament to his inefficiency as a leader. After all, how can a man from such impoverished beginnings as an uneducated and penniless artist be fit to manage the economy of a nation? Even Hitler admitted how all he wanted to do was: devote myself to my dream [of being an artist] (Giblin 2002, p. 8) Nevertheless, Hitler’s ascent to power was characterized by his economic policies which appealed to millions of unemployed Germans living during the depression. These polices rested specifically on his Four Year Plan, which as he described: will give permanent employment to… workmen who are now… [involved in] the gigantic economic development of our people. (Hitler, A. 1937) This statement, made in 1937 is interesting as it gives some clue of Hitler’s future intentions. This “gigantic economic development” he describes was the rearmament of Nazi Germany. As you can see on the graph behind me, it was at this point that Nazi defence expenditure began to take a massive hike. (Appendix B) Hitler was obviously gearing the German economy for war, and this was the reason for the massive decline in the numbers of the German unemployed. However, as Hughes summarized: Hitler had never seriously considered an economic future for Germany. (Hughes 2000, p.37) Quite plainly, an economic leader, Hitler lacked the foresight to tailor his policies to plan and prepare for the future. Although it has been argued that Hitler’s greatest strength was his economic policies which lifted Germany out of the depression, this is quite plainly not the case. Hitler’s goal was to restore the German Empire to its former glory through a show of military might and so, as Hughes summarized: [He] neglected many areas of domestic policy, including the economy. (Hughes 2000, p.36) So intent was he on increasing Germany’s army, that he squandered away the government budget. He simply lacked the education and the initiative to plan his expenditure, a thing which for all national leaders is a requirement. It is for this reason that Hitler was not a suitable leader. His neglect of the German economy and its other crucially important areas; such as health and welfare confirm his lack of foresight. For Hitler, as it could be speculated, not much of his overspending had changed since his days as a penniless artist, except the ramifications. 

Adolph Hitler was an incompetent leader who was not suited to rule Germany. In conclusion it was a range of factors which marked him as an unsuitable choice for leadership. For, while his medical condition prevented him from making rational decisions, his inexperience as a military commander and inability to delegate his subordinates to their roles saw him make elementary mistakes on the field of battle, while his misguided resolve never to retreat nor surrender saw him squander the lives of thousands of valuable troops. Finally, his rampant mismanagement of the German economy decimated the German industry. These flaws and weaknesses in Hitler’s character saw him bring Germany to its knees, further reinforcing the fact that despite his ability to win the people over, he was useless as a leader. For although Goebbels declared: He is the greatest historic genius of our times, with him we shall see victory, or go down heroically. (Braunbeck, A. 1997) Ironically they got neither.

Appendices 

Appendix A: Schneider, W. (2006). World War II Casualties. (Online). 

Available: Source

Appendix B: Answers.com. (2007). Events preceding World War II in Europe. (Online). 

Available: Source

Annotated Bibliography 

Answers.com. (2007). Events preceding World War II in Europe. (Online). 

Available: Source

This website was extremely informative, containing excellent coverage of the topic. The information was presented in a factual manner with no bias evident in the text. The publishing company had its logo predominantly displayed on the site and I found this website a useful source where I obtained a graph used in my appendix. It is a recent site and its only downside was its lack of primary sources to back up its arguments. 

Bodine, R. (2002). Hitler the Military Leader. (Online). 

Available: Source 

The author’s name was prominently displayed on this site and all the information available was concurrent with other sources investigated. The site contained a good deal of information and both sides of the story where told with excellent primary quotes referred to. The information was presented in a factual manner with no bias evident. This source is relatively modern, only created in 2002, and I found its contents extremely useful and interesting. 

Bradley, J. (1978). Third Reich. London : PRC Publishing Ltd 

This book was an extremely useful source, containing a wealth of hundreds of relevant photographs. No bias was evident in the text, which was presented in a factual and neutral manner. One downside to this source was the lack of written primary sources, instead of the focus on visual. The author holds a doctorate and the book’s coverage is excellent. Despite not being a recent book, all information concurred with other sources. 

Braunbeck, Muller, A. (1997). A Military Leadership Analysis of Adolf Hitler. (Online). 

Available: Source

This website was publishing a research paper presented to a professor holding a doctorate at a military college. It is a few years old, but the information is still relevant to today. I found this source to be very useful and all arguments were backed up by an array of primary quotes. The author’s tone portrayed no obvious bias and the report was of an excellent standard covering an array of points. 

Giblin, J. (2002). Adolph Hitler. New York : Clarion Books 

This source discussed in great depth the life of Adolph Hitler. It referred to numerous primary sources and no bias was evident in the text. All arguments were backed up by primary evidence, and I found this book to be very useful. The coverage was excellent and the information up-to-date as the book had been written relatively recently. 

Hitler, A. (1925). Mein Kampf. (Online). 

Available: Source

This website contains the literary work of Hitler – Mein Kampf or My Struggle that was the Nazi “bible.” No evidence could be found of the individual running the site or translating the test could be found, but this source was an extremely interesting and useful primary source. 

Hitler, A. (1937). Berlin, Reichstag Speech. (Online). 

Available: Source

This website contained the transcripts of Hitler’s speech at the Reichstag in 1937. Again this was another useful primary source. However this page also contained no information on the person who posted it on the net or translated it. 

Hughes, M. (2000). Inside Hitler’s Germany. London : Brown Partworks 

This book contained extremely detailed information on life in Germany under the Nazi regime. It contained numerous quotes and on the whole I found this source extremely useful. The information was presented in a factual manner which was backed up by numerous primary sources. No bias was evident in the text and the book was published only a few years ago. I found its coverage of the topic to be extensive. 

Irving, D. (2002). Hitler’s War. (Online). 

Available: Source

I found this website to be an excellently referenced source which backed up all its arguments with plenty of primary quotes. The information coverage was excellent and no bias could be found in its presentation. The site is relatively recent and I found it very useful. The author had his name predominantly displayed on the site. 

Kimel, A. (2005). Direct Causes of the Holocaust. (Online).

Available: Source

The articles posted on this website were written by a holocaust survivor whose name and status were clearly presented at the top of the page. Undoubtedly the author would (rightly) have some bias against Hitler and the Nazi’s and it shows. Nevertheless it was still an excellent source which delved in-depth into numerous issues about the war. All arguments were accompanied by primary quotes which I found very useful. The website is very recent so the information is up-to-date. 

Readers digest. (1963). Secrets and Stories of the War. London : Readers Digest 

Despite the age of this book, I still found this source to be extremely useful. It contained a wealth of primary sources, including witness accounts. The information was presented in a factual manner and no bias was evident. Furthermore the publishing company is a very reputable business. 

Rochefort, J. (2002). Hitler. (Online). 

Available: Source

This source critically examined Hitler, only focussing on his bad qualities may indicate the author having some bias against the man. It is a relatively recent website, and the author’s name was cleared shown on the site. All insinuations were backed up by numerous primary sources and I found this site to be very useful for my assignment.

Schneider, W. (2006). World War II Casualties. (Online). 

Available: Source

This was a very useful website which drew on numerous relevant and valid primary sources. No bias was evident in the text and the site is quite recent. The author’s name was clearly displayed on the site and the coverage of the topic was excellent. I used this website to attain a graph for my appendices, which I referred to in my speech. 

Simkin, J. (2003). Spartacus Educational. (Online). 

Available: Source

This source was extremely factual and the information was presented in a neutral tone with no evident bias. It displayed a series of referenced primary quotes with little speculation. The author has a series of degrees and has written numerous books so I was confident that this was a reputable source. It contained a great deal of coverage from numerous primary sources and I found it extremely useful. The site was also relatively recent.