Click Here to Search COSHE’s Database Again Hitler was arguably one of the most loved and hated men of his time. He hypnotized a nation into supporting one the most controversial political regime’s ever. With his empty promises and lies upon lies he gained control of the German government in the early and mid 1930’s. Only to lead the people of Germany and the rest of the world into one of the darkest times the human race has ever known. The way Hitler made his way to the top of the German government can best be summarized as “pushy”.
The story behind this amazing way in which an Austrian born failed painter made his way from the slums of Vienna to the top seat of the German government is anything but a matter of luck. These articles from the New York Times on September 26, 1930 and August 24,1932 illustrate the type of ruthless political behavior Hitler is best remembered by, and for taking himself to the top with. Both concentrate on the ways that Hitler came into power, and have similar characteristics in the way they appear in the paper. Both articles are based what Hitler would like to see happen in the future for himself and Germany.
The differences between the two articles are the amount of power Hitler had at his disposal to use as leverage in getting his way. The two of these articles deal with the way in which Hitler came into power by promising and demanding the people of Germany to unite behind him. On Thursday September 25, 1930 Hitler was subpoenaed to testify in the trial of three Reichswer officers accused of treason in connection with Fascist plotting in the German army. What was supposed to be testimony turned more into a political rally for Hitler. In his testimony he explains what he would do with the Versailles Treaty and what he would do with those he called the criminals that signed it.
The story made front-page headlines in the New York Times the next day. Hitler used this time to preach his message to the government and people of Germany. He explained how his party would help the German people break free from the guilt of WW I. He would do this by gaining control of the government within the legal means. Even if it was looked upon as illegal activity by the rest of the world.
His message was consistently looking towards the future with his political party leading the way with himself as its ringmaster. This quote puts his attitude about the future into perspective, ” That Germany that now hails our movement into court will some day be glad that our movement was begun. National Socialism will convert this defeatist pacifist State into a nation of iron strength and will.” This type of message is also portrayed in the article from August 24, 1932. Two years after his historic testimony in front of the Supreme Court of Germany his dream of his National Socialist party gaining control of the government was coming true.
His party had gained so much power and control in the government that President Von Hindenburg and Chancellor Von Papen had to arrange a meeting with Hitler to see his intentions for the future. They arranged this meeting due to their fear of his ability to take over the government. In this meeting Hitler was offered a secondary high-ranking position. Hitler refused the offer and demanded the power of a dictatorship. He wanted the same powers as Mussolini had acquired in Italy.
The two of these articles are very similar in many ways. They are both related to some of the major events leading up to the take over of the government by Hitler. The first article was laying the foundations for the events of the second article. Hitler needed a forum to spread his message to large amounts of people. He did this with speeches and forums like the example from the first article.
We see he succeeded in doing this by the power his party had acquired by the time the second article had been written. The President and Chancellor knew that the take over was evident and there was nothing they could do about this. So they set up this last effort to stop this from happening. This quote from President Hindenburg shows their attitudes toward the inevitable take over just after Hitler turned down his offer, ” You are to be then in opposition.
I trust you will oppose I a way that will be chivalrous. And I enjoin you in your future course to keep always in mind your duty to the Fatherland and your responsibility to the German people.” Both articles were on the front-page of the New York Times at the time they were written. They were on the front page for a reason. This was big news throughout the world not just Germany. The accuracy of these articles stands up to the historical background that we have learned so far from the readings in The Rise and Fall Of The Third Reich by William Shirer and have discussed in class. The predictions in both of the articles might not be exact with amount of members the Nazis had in the government.
The overall predictions of Hitler and how he would eventually lead the German people were true, and supported with what we know today. Some of the differences between these two articles are the obvious. The time the events took place and what happened in each article. One major difference between the two articles is the amount of power Hitler had at his disposal to get his way. In the first article his party was just getting rolling and gaining public support.
His tone was one of more explaining his party’s goals and objectives. He was almost pleading for public support. This quote shows this type of behavior, ” If our movement succeeds we shall erect a people’s tribunal before which the November criminals of 1918 shall expiate their crime and I frankly predict you shall then see their heads in the sand.” He’s predicting about the future. There is no assurance that he will ever succeed. His tone in the second article is one of a much more confident sense. Instead of predicting the future he then had the power to control his parties fate.
He was no longer answering questions from the government. He was now asking the questions and determining the fate of the government by using his powerful arsenal of representatives as leverage. These two articles have many similarities and differences. The one consistence element is Hitler and his dreams. His dreams of ruling Germany and eventually most of the world.
These two articles are great examples how his political machine got started. His rise and fall of power is one of the most dramatic and controversial stories ever. The articles just give a minute look into the beginning of this controversial person and time in the world. Click Here to Search COSHE’s Database Again Hitler was arguably one of the most loved and hated men of his time.
He hypnotized a nation into supporting one the most controversial political regime’s ever. With his empty promises and lies upon lies he gained control of the German government in the early and mid 1930’s. Only to lead the people of Germany and the rest of the world into one of the darkest times the human race has ever known. The way Hitler made his way to the top of the German government can best be summarized as “pushy”. The story behind this amazing way in which an Austrian born failed painter made his way from the slums of Vienna to the top seat of the German government is anything but a matter of luck.
These articles from the New York Times on September 26, 1930 and August 24,1932 illustrate the type of ruthless political behavior Hitler is best remembered by, and for taking himself to the top with. Both concentrate on the ways that Hitler came into power, and have similar characteristics in the way they appear in the paper. Both articles are based what Hitler would like to see happen in the future for himself and Germany. The differences between the two articles are the amount of power Hitler had at his disposal to use as leverage in getting his way. The two of these articles deal with the way in which Hitler came into power by promising and demanding the people of Germany to unite behind him. On Thursday September 25, 1930 Hitler was subpoenaed to testify in the trial of three Reichswer officers accused of treason in connection with Fascist plotting in the German army.
What was supposed to be testimony turned more into a political rally for Hitler. In his testimony he explains what he would do with the Versailles Treaty and what he would do with those he called the criminals that signed it. The story made front-page headlines in the New York Times the next day. Hitler used this time to preach his message to the government and people of Germany. He explained how his party would help the German people break free from the guilt of WW I. He would do this by gaining control of the government within the legal means.
Even if it was looked upon as illegal activity by the rest of the world. His message was consistently looking towards the future with his political party leading the way with himself as its ringmaster. This quote puts his attitude about the future into perspective, ” That Germany that now hails our movement into court will some day be glad that our movement was begun. National Socialism will convert this defeatist pacifist State into a nation of iron strength and will.” This type of message is also portrayed in the article from August 24, 1932. Two years after his historic testimony in front of the Supreme Court of Germany his dream of his National Socialist party gaining control of the government was coming true.
His party had gained so much power and control in the government that President Von Hindenburg and Chancellor Von Papen had to arrange a meeting with Hitler to see his intentions for the future. They arranged this meeting due to their fear of his ability to take over the government. In this meeting Hitler was offered a secondary high-ranking position. Hitler refused the offer and demanded the power of a dictatorship. He wanted the same powers as Mussolini had acquired in Italy.
The two of these articles are very similar in many ways. They are both related to some of the major events leading up to the take over of the government by Hitler. The first article was laying the foundations for the events of the second article. Hitler needed a forum to spread his message to large amounts of people. He did this with speeches and forums like the example from the first article. We see he succeeded in doing this by the power his party had acquired by the time the second article had been written.
The President and Chancellor knew that the take over was evident and there was nothing they could do about this. So they set up this last effort to stop this from happening. This quote from President Hindenburg shows their attitudes toward the inevitable take over just after Hitler turned down his offer, ” You are to be then in opposition. I trust you will oppose I a way that will be chivalrous. And I enjoin you in your future course to keep always in mind your duty to the Fatherland and your responsibility to the German people.” Both articles were on the front-page of the New York Times at the time they were written. They were on the front page for a reason.
This was big news throughout the world not just Germany. The accuracy of these articles stands up to the historical background that we have learned so far from the readings in The Rise and Fall Of The Third Reich by William Shirer and have discussed in class. The predictions in both of the articles might not be exact with amount of members the Nazis had in the government. The overall predictions of Hitler and how he would eventually lead the German people were true, and supported with what we know today. Some of the differences between these two articles are the obvious.
The time the events took place and what happened in each article. One major difference between the two articles is the amount of power Hitler had at his disposal to get his way. In the first article his party was just getting rolling and gaining public support. His tone was one of more explaining his party’s goals and objectives. He was almost pleading for public support.
This quote shows this type of behavior, ” If our movement succeeds we shall erect a people’s tribunal before which the November criminals of 1918 shall expiate their crime and I frankly predict you shall then see their heads in the sand.” He’s predicting about the future. There is no assurance that he will ever succeed. His tone in the second article is one of a much more confident sense. Instead of predicting the future he then had the power to control his parties fate. He was no longer answering questions from the government.
He was now asking the questions and determining the fate of the government by using his powerful arsenal of representatives as leverage. These two articles have many similarities and differences. The one consistence element is Hitler and his dreams. His dreams of ruling Germany and eventually most of the world.
These two articles are great examples how his political machine got started. His rise and fall of power is one of the most dramatic and controversial stories ever. The articles just give a minute look into the beginning of this controversial person and time in the world. Bibliography:
