Nazi Reign

In 1933, The Nazi Regime had become a growing issue in the politics of Germany. In the years that followed, Hitler became a powerful influence on the entire political world and was the reason for the start of the 2nd world war due to his cruel acts of genocide on people that were classified under different groups (Jewish descent, Sinti and Roma, homosexuals, psychiatric patients, and the handicapped). The factors associated with the regime takeover were interpreted differently by many historians; because of this there were many agreements and disagreements that I have compared.

The arguments that I have seen between the articles I have compared are that one author seems to believe that it was a slow process of political arguments for the Nazi party to take power in Germany while the other author states that the takeover had been from corruption within the systems of an already rotting society. In the course book, the author is using the historical facts of how the regime was well organized to make the takeover a success. The book also states that Hitler had used his legal appointment as chancellor of the Weimar Republic to consolidate his command of the Nazi party and put his party into control of the state. When the Nazi Party did become the strongest party, other political parties were strongly encouraged to dissolve and join the Nazi Party as the only legal party in Germany. This showed that the Nazi Regime was more than just a change in power within the government but a complete change in the future of Germany. In my comparing article, the author feels that it was not so much organized as it was pure mass confusion amongst the citizens. They feel that "the average Nazi citizen did not so much live in a state of terror as in a state of delusion tinged by delirium". This article continued to show that some Germans had tried to stand as a resistance to the regime but was politically ineffective.

While comparing the articles I have found an agreement between the two, both authors felt that during the first years of Hitler's reign he did not intend for the country to go directly into a war. Some evidence showed that Hitler had not wanted to take his country into battle until the mid 1940s. During the first years of Hitler's reign, the national birth rate increased by 22% which is usually a sure sign of an increase in public confidence. Also during the first year, the crime rate had dropped noticeably. During this time, war preparations and economic recovery did away with joblessness. These factors showed what was thought as a positive step for Germany. But after four years of war, the shortage of food in Germany had begun and the economy had begun to fail. By this time, the state of Germany had been turned into a communist country and had focused on the military aspects of their country. This followed Tilly's theory of "War makes states and states make war". That was exactly what eventually happened and caused the rest of the world to step in and stop these sick acts of genocide.

The way the authors used facts from history were similar in both of the articles that I have compared. The source from the book gave a better background of what had happened and about the genocide of the thousands of people. The article I used had more opinions from people that had actually