Discuss Hitler’s eventual gaining of Lebensraum. Was it merely opportunistic or astutely planned?

Authors Avatar

I.S History Essay

Question: Discuss Hitler’s  eventual gaining of Lebensraum. Was it merely opportunistic or astutely  planned?

        The argument that Hitler’s objectives were to expand the Reich is one that cannot be argued against. In 1920 the German Workers’ Party changed its name to the National Socialist German Workers’ Party ( or the Nazi party ). It also published its manifesto ; “We demand ....the revocation of peace treaties. We demand land and territory to feed our people and settle our surplus population.” Again 17 years in an address known as the ‘Hossbach memorandum’  Hitler stressed  his goal that  gains in land mass must be made. There can be no argument that Hitler and the Nazi’s were primarily seeking land. Hitler’s eventual gaining of land around Europe is a subject of ongoing debate. Did Hitler plan the expansion of the Reich or was this goal of his carried out by fortunate circumstances. It essential to concentrate on Hitler’s own words to gain insight into this question.

        This essay will focus on two reputable historians who have strong arguments for and against the question at hand. A J P Taylor presents an argument that Hitler “ ..did not make plans- for world conquest or anything else. He assumed that others would provide opportunities and that he would seize them.” H. R. Trevor- Roper has put forth an aggressive critique on Taylor’s notable work ‘The Origins of the Second World War’ . Trevor - Roper  dismissing his writings  as poorly researched and that he prematurely dismissing evidence that sways against his argument.

        Although theses historians will be used to support the respective arguments personal research will make up the main structures, as there seems to be countless amounts of information that these historians have missed. The contemporary historic community seems fairly divided regarding this debate, although possibly with a slight slant towards a more structuralist approach. In the later parts of the analyses the two fundamentals of the arguments will be presented with a personal conclusion drawn.

        In essence Mr Taylor has stripped himself of all emotions towards the Germans , entering a plain of neutrality , where he feels by studying the documents and sources of the period he can best draw conclusions about the events that unfolded. It is in these documents and sources that his critics mostly draw fuel to attack his personal conclusions. Hitler is presented by Mr Taylor as a man with objectives an a great deal of patience. He was a leader who took advantage of a situation , seeking neither war nor unrightful territory. In essence  this is the character that the opportunist argument believes Hitler to be. Mr Taylor is of firm opinion that Hitler was not about global domination ( and in some cases nor is the ‘programme’ line ) but wished the expansion or union of Smaller central European states such as Austria and Czechoslovakia. Analysing Talyor’s argument, two points are presented which illustrate and support the oppurtunistic argument firmly.

        One of Mr Taylor’s strong factors in denouncing a blue print or ‘programme’ for German expansion, is a discussion  between Hitler and his senior advisors and commanders in on the 5th of November 1937. The statements made by Hitler are known as the ‘ Hossbach memorandum ’ named after the man who wrote it. Taylor speculates that this is suppose to contain Hitler’s plan’s so hence the historical significance of the statements. On the 5th of November Hitler called a conference in the Chancellery. It is recorded that  the participants were Neurath ( the minister of war) , Fritsch ( the foreign minister ) , Raeder ( commander in chief of the Army) and the commander in chief of both the air force and navy. Hitler began discussing the need for Lebensraum ( land or territory).Particular areas were not specified but he stressed that particular gains had to be made. Hitler realised  as already discussed that force would have to be used to acquire such territory. The question remained how and when was this force going to be asserted? Hitler presented three different scenario’s.

Join now!

        The first : - Hitler proclaimed that 1943 was a year for action. The Second : - Civil war in France had began “ ..the time for action against the Czechs had come.” - Hitler. The Third : - War between France and Italy occurred “ our objective must be to overthrow Czechoslovakia  and Austria simultaneously” - Hitler.

        Taylor states simplistically “ None of these cases came true; clearly therefore they do not provide the blue print for German policy” - A J P Taylor ‘The Origins of the Second World War’ pg 169. This point is the greatest factor ...

This is a preview of the whole essay