Hitler also realised after the Putsch that he would have to follow the road of democracy instead of violence, if he was to give himself any realistic possibilities of holding power. This change in direction was the main reason why the Nazis found themselves in power in the mid 1930s. It is almost certain that the party would not have gained power if hey had continued with their campaign of violence.
2) Source Work: How useful is source one for an historian studying the impact of the Hitler Youth movement on young people in Nazi Germany?
Source one is very useful as a piece of evidence for an historian studying the impact of the Hitler Youth movement on young people in Nazi Germany.
It is taken from a Socialist Democratic Party report concerning young people’s involvement in the Hitler Youth movement (the SPD were one of Hitler’s biggest political opponents). It tells us that young people were very much in favour of the Hitler Youth movement and felt that they gained form it. The movement placed more emphasis on the ‘Volksgemeinschaft’ (national community), and not on each individual family and person. This definitely, according to the source, appealed to young men. It made people believe that they would find employment if they helped in the persecution of Jews and Marxists. Hitler also let peasant youth be associated with the state; this was somewhat unprecedented.
It is important that we analyse this source for reliability. It would be fair to say in my opinion, hat this source is quite reliable in he main, this being because it is written by an opposition party, very much opposed to Nazi ideology. Yet it commends Nazi work with young people saying, “…all that is marvellous.” It is a report for Socialists to read and yet it commends the Nazis. The only thing that I can find to criticise this source with is that it may be a bi too general. It seems to imply that all of the German Youth did in fact support these movements. There might have been support for these movements in he author’s own town or region, but this mightn’t have been reflective of the views of the country as a whole. And I know that there was a dissatisfied group of youths, known as the ‘Edelweiss Pirates’ who were strongly against the Hitler Youth movement. Also this is only the opinion of the author, and he/she might not be able to speak on behalf of the whole SPD.
2) How do sources one and three differ?
Source one differs from source three as it provides us with a positive view of Nazi Youth groups, whereas source three shows us that not all the German youth were in favour of state run groups.
Source one paints us the picture of young men enjoying the novelty of wearing uniform, taking part in army style drills, enjoying life in army style camps, and actively giving something to the community. Also many of the young involved in the Hitler Youth movement believed that if the persecuted minorities they would have better employment opportunities. However source three tells us of the ‘Edelweiss Pirates’, a youth group opposed to the Nazis. This “riff-raff”, (as source one describes them) supposedly stay out late at night, associate with young women and generally act as a discredit to society. The source accuses these young people of writing anti-Hitler slogans on walls such as “Down with Hitler”. They are described as a danger to young people and are generally held up as scape- goats for the Nazi regime’s failures.
The authorship and motives are also very important in assessing how sources differ. Source one is written by the SDP and source three was written by the Nazis for the SDP and the Gestapo.