Reichstag Fire

Authors Avatar

Reichstag Fire: Case Study

Question One

The picture in Source A depicts the Reichstag smouldering on the morning of February 28th 1933. By the date, we notice it was still burning the day after the initial attack, signifying to us the strength and intensity of the fire itself. Also in the picture are bystanders, staring in awe at their government building in smoke. This indicates the incredulity and amazement the onlookers are feeling and the sight of the Reichstag on fire is so shocking, they are compelled to stop their journeys to stare at it as it burns.

Question Two

The sources are useful in telling us who started the fire. Source B suggests Van der Lubbe acted alone, whereas Source C disagrees, saying it was a communist plot and the beginning of an uprising. In addition, they are useful in proving Germany was unsure about the cause of the fire; however, some people found a confession from the main suspect convincing enough to conclude that it was Van der Lubbe.

We learn from Source B some of Van der Lubbe’s motives. He said “since the workers would do nothing, I had to do something myself”. This tells us he was unhappy with the way Germany was being run, the fact that no one was taking any action against the Nazis gaining authority and that he did not like the Nazi’s powerful status and he wanted to harm “something that belonged to the system”.

However, we do not know if this confession by Van der Lubbe was a forced one. He may have been held at gunpoint and compelled to claim he committed arson against the Reichstag. Furthermore, Source B doesn’t tell us Van der Lubbe’s reasons for leaving the communist party prior to the fire, or why he cared about German politics even though he’s Dutch, weakening the sources credibility.

Source C suggests, “the communists had made a final attempt to seize power” and that they would do this by creating an atmosphere of “panic and terror”. Goebbels also said there was “no doubt”, which tells us Goebbels had already formed an opinion about the cause of the fire, maybe before he even arrived at the smouldering Reichstag. The Nazi’s would’ve had the motive to blame the communists at any given chance to damage and weaken them, meaning the Nazis could acquire more power and authority.

However, Source C doesn’t tell us when Goebbels wrote the diary entry or why Goebbels formed such a strong opinion so soon, and why he though it was the “last attempt for the communists to seize power”, making this a possible exaggeration of the events, or maybe the information presented in this diary entry has been selectively modified because Goebbels was aware the diary would one day be read.

Despite these differences, both sources are useful as they corroborate together to form the judgement that the fire was a violent act against the system of government within the Weimar. In addition, they support each other to suggest the Communists had political motives and that they were involved in the Reichstag Fire.

Join now!

Question Three

Both sources D and T show that the Nazis used the Reichstag Fire to their advantage as political propaganda. They did this by explicitly presenting the fire as the beginning of a communist uprising. Source D tells us of a “national revolution” with a picture of the Reichstag on fire and armed communists surrounding it, representing violence and force that the Nazi‘s said the Communists would use. The Nazi’s would’ve approved this book to be published, and probably even wrote it themselves.

Source E could also be interpreted as propaganda by convincing the public ...

This is a preview of the whole essay