• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Resistance to Hitler's regime

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Keri Hilton Resistance to the Hitler regime a) Study sources B and C. Compare these sources as evidence for the methods used by left wing opposition to the Hitler regime. I believe these two sources are good evidence for the methods used by left wing opposition, as they both suggest similar tactics used by the left wing opponents. The first method that both sources clearly mention is the use of leaflets. Source B mentions that the KPD used pamphlets in order to spread the opposition, the source also mentions that the SPD used leaflets to criticise the Nazi party. Similarly, source C mentions that into 1937 the Communists were making leaflets and distributing these illegal leaflets to many people. There are certainly many facts to back this statement up and suggesting that leaflets were indeed made, providing opposition to the Nazis. However, they were banned as a political party in 1933, so they formed an underground organisation and produced leaflets within workplaces. This is the second point that both the sources agree on, which is that the communists targeted the workplaces and factories to spread their leaflets. This is clearly true as underground movements went to large factories in Berlin and Munich to spread anti Nazi messages in their leaflets. ...read more.

Middle

These points will later be picked up on by many of the sources. Source D also mentions that the resistors were only a minority. This was very much the truth. Stories of resistance by Germans to the Nazis are hard to find and perhaps the most well known story is that of Hans and Sophie Scholl. These two created leaflets talking about many of the atrocities committed by the Nazis, they then set about spreading them amongst other youths at Munich University. They believed that they would truly have an effect, however, the support for their leaflets was minimal and as a result they were reported to the Gestapo, who placed SS officers at the university in the hope of catching any "traitorous" activity. The Scholl's were caught and executed by the Gestapo and in reality had very little effect on their fellow peers' points of view. This source, like source C, also talks about how these were, in reality, acts of courage and sacrifice. Most people in Germany realised that resistance to the Nazis would result in certain imprisonment and possible death; this helped to ensure that the resistance to the Nazi party was very minimal. Thousands of Nazi opponents were sent to labour or concentration camps, after being reported to the Gestapo by fellow Germans who were so fearful that they were forced to comply with the rules laid down by the Nazis. ...read more.

Conclusion

Therefore, giving fear of a communist take over as the reason for the lack of opposition, is a poor suggestion and is merely an excuse for the intimidated and scared Germans, who could only "grumble" against the Nazis, instead of being more prepared to seriously fight against the Nazi party. I believe that these sources do show that the opposition was too weak to challenged the Nazis, however, I believe that the key reason for the weak opposition was the fact that the Nazi regime was so good at preventing the opposition and crushing any slight form of opposition they saw. This can be seen as both sources C and D mention the fact that everyone realised how dangerous it was to rebel against the Nazi party. The clearest sign of ruthless Nazi reaction was the reaction to the July Plot of 1944. Claus von Stauffenburg placed a bomb in an office where Hitler was in a meeting, unfortunately the bomb was moved from its original position and the walls took the impact of the blast. As a result Hitler was not killed and was barely injured; however, some 200 conspirators were hunted down and ruthlessly murdered. I therefore believe that sources showed that the opposition was weak, however, I do not believe that this was the oppositions' fault, I think that the Nazis were some prolific and ruthless, that opposition to them stood no chance in stopping the Nazis. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Modern European History, 1789-1945 section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Modern European History, 1789-1945 essays

  1. Was Hitler a weak dictator?

    so strong army and the risk of having a war by middle 1930's would be devastating. When he made the Anschluss with Austria in 1938 thw whole world expected foreign intervention to start a war in that moment, it didn't happen and Hitler continued this tactic until Poland, when war was declared by the British.

  2. Hitler and the Nazi Regime - revision sheet.

    o 'protective custody' - people taken without trial/right of appeal o Headed by guards of SS Death Head units who had total power o Communists, Jews, and 'asocials' (homos, beggars, habitual criminals) Some dies others reformed and released o Takeover of Austria and Sudetenland led to increase in arrests.

  1. Causes of show trials + purges of 1930s.

    Trotsky's skill as an orator was unrivalled by any other socialist. He was often described as having 'the oratorical skill to set his listeners on fire'. Lenin was skilled in arguing but was unable to arouse the Proletariat causing it to follow their leadership.

  2. Describe the main forms of opposition to the Nazi regime, 1933 - 1939/Why did ...

    Uncertainty, internal divisions, the reluctance to use force against Hitler and mistrust of the Allies weakened the group. The Protestant and Catholic churches both submitted easily to the Nazis, which was surprising due the apparent strength of the churches. The Catholic Church had good potential to stand independent of the

  1. Hitlers Germany

    left and by moderate supporters of democracy, who now saw Hindenburg as their last hope to preserve the Weimar system against the Nazis. This was not a reassuring development for the future of the republic, since Hindenburg had once been an opponent of the republic and was now approaching senility.

  2. Nietzsche and the Nazis.

    She interpreted everything in Nietzsche's philosophy as creating a perfect accord with Nazi ideologies and values. In other words, she served Nietzsche's philosophy on the ideological plates of the Nazi leaders as the main food of their meal. After the death of Nietzsche, Elizabeth took over the control of Nietzschean

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work