One area of contention within the ‘Weak Dictator’ debate is surrounding Nazi racial policies, and whether the Racial Policies can be utilised as evidence for Hitler being a weak dictator. The Euthanasia T4 programme, is heavily debated on whether it shows Hitler as a weak or strong dictator. The euthanasia programme was also known as the Aktion T4 programme after the abbreviation of the road where they recruited, and paid personnel associated with Aktion T4, Tiergartenstrasse, The Tiergartenstrasse was introduced by Adolf Hitler in 1939, to systematically kill the incurably ill and physically or mentally disabled, it was officially ended in 1941, however, the euthanasia programme was continued until the defeat of the German forces in 1945. Hitler’s personal Doctor Karl Brandt was under trial, where he stated, “the plans legally regulating euthanasia which had already been considered during the years 1933-35, and then postponed due to resistance from the church.” This source can be seen as useful as Brandt, Hitler’s personal doctor, would’ve had access to confidential files and been in meetings where the aims of the Nazi policy would have been clearly outlined and explained to him. Furthermore, the source being withdrawn from a court hearing outlines that Brandt had no ulterior motive to distort the truth as many of the monstrosities committed by the Nazi party had been widespread, and his death, along with many of the other higher-ranking Nazi officials was impending. Hitler’s relationship with the church was varied across the regime. He used a concordat in 1933, to help “suppress the opposition to National Socialism from the Catholic Church.” However, this relationship turned quickly sour, due to the implementation of unfavourable polices, such as the Aktion T4 which was met with heavy resistance from the Catholic Church, especially from Bishop Von Galen. This can be argued to show Hitler as a weak dictator as he surrenders to the churches wishes. In contrast to this it can be argued that his resistance of the Kirchenkampf, the war against the church, which was heavily supported by Bormann and Goebbels, along with the concession to the church of ending the Aktion T4 programme was Hitler manipulating the church to “exploit catholic conservatism and anti-communism”. Therefore, this can be seen as Hitler being a strong dictator as his is making concessions to help retain his power, using a potential enemy to a means for his own aims. Furthermore, in October 1939, the Action T4 programme was reintroduced, this shows Hitler as weak as he waited until a war which would arguably divert focus, to reintroduce the heavily opposed programme. However, it could be argued that Hitler ceased the programme originally to focus on the war, rather than having to divert focus onto more than one important policy. This shows him as a strong dictator, due to the fact that his main views, the war, were at the forefront of his policies. Subsequent to the opposition, the Euthanasia programme was officially ceased in 1941, after “public protests by few senior Roman Catholic (or protestant) clerics began in August 1941” such as the sermon from Bishop Clemens Galen on August 3rd and the programme continued behind the scenes until the end of the war, where up to 300,000 people were euthanised. This shows Hitler as a weak dictator as he was subject to criticism, and he could be argued to be influenced by the will of the people. This view is reinforced by Pascoe, who argues that Hitler’s unwillingness to implement radical policies was due to his fear of a sharp decline in popularity with the German people. German historian Friedlander also reinforces this view as he argues that “Hitler was probably pushed to issue his so-called stop order primarily due to widespread public knowledge about the killings” this clearly highlights the effect discontent had towards Hitler, with Hitler making sure that any discontent was dealt with in such a way, that he would not end up as disliked by the public. In regards to the Aktion T4 programme Hitler can be seen as a weak dictator as he didn’t have complete control over the population. However, some credit can be given to the strong dictator debate as Hitler understood his position and utilised the church and the populations views on him to maintain his power.
Another area in which Hitler can be seen to be a weak dictator is through his response to the Rosenstrasse protest, which occurred on February 27th until March 6th, 1943. This protest occurred after the imprisonment of intermarried Jewish men. The imprisonment was to help purify Germany, an ideological view and aim Hitler held throughout his regime, Hitler himself claimed that “such mating is contrary to the will of Nature for a higher breeding of all life”. This quote from Hitler can be seen as valid evidence to suggest that the imprisonment of the intermarried men was against his own ideological beliefs and their imprisonment arguably was down to this. However, in regard the weak dictator debate the Rosenstrasse protests are used as evidence to suggest Hitler was a weak dictator. This is argued as only 150-200 women protested outside where the Jewish men were incarcerated, but the Jewish men were still released due to fear of further uprising. A quote from Stollzfus supports this view of the inherent fear of unrest, “The dictator feared social unrest more than he experienced it.”. This interpretation on Hitler being a weak dictator is furthered supported by Stollzfus who claimed that “Despite his great power as the feared dictator, eliciting conscious consent to his rule from all the German people remained his basic goal.” This argument can be backed up by the small amount of protestors it took Hitler to release the incarcerated Jews. Kweit argues that “The successful outcome of this late protest gives rise to the possibility that similar actions at an earlier stage might have redirected the destructive, escalating course of the Nazi’s” However, with the Nazi party re-collecting the captured men the next day, and no other protests similar to that of Rosenstrasse it is unclear whether this interpretation can be seen to be true.
Overall, it can be seen that the reaction from Hitler after the Rosenstrasse protest was an action of a weak dictator, as not only could Hitler not control the public, he conceded to their wishes and granted the Jewish men freedom. This went against his views outlined in his book Mein Kampf. However, he can arguably be seen as strong as the concession to the women protesting was only one day, and then the next day return and recollect the Jewish men.
2019-4-5-1554491084