The Holocaust was not planned from the beginning, it was the result of a chain of circumstances Do you agree?

Authors Avatar

“The Holocaust was not planned from the beginning, it was the result of a chain of circumstances” Do you agree?

The Holocaust is an extremely difficult historical event to analyse and interpret for a number of reasons. The connotations of inherent evil and destruction the word has come to be associated with following the Second World War has made any attempts to pragmatically and objectively discuss the subject a complicated task. Historians who attempt to research and dissect one of the most poignant and significant events of the 20th Century are faced with an emotive and delicate area which needs to be approached in an according manner. In response to such a huge loss of human life by ridiculously inhumane means, it has become commonplace for the public, and certain historians, to accredit the guilt and blame for the catastrophe at the door of Adolf Hitler, and place his pathological and undoubted hatred of the Jewish race as central to the cause and effect of the systematic extermination of 6 million Jewish people. For many, attributing the event to the satanic evil and wickedness of one man is a comfortable way of coming to terms with the Holocaust, and makes it somewhat more believable. The notion that only the concerted evil efforts of one man could be to blame for the plight of the Jewish citizens of Europe is more appealing to many, when contrasted with the notion that Hitler was a product of an anti-Semitic atmosphere, rather than the pretext to one.                                                                                                 Another issue facing the historian when formulating responses to the Holocaust is the often vague and ambiguous evidence left behind by the Nazi leadership following the Second World War. Hitler in particular was notorious for his distinctly un-bureaucratic manner of governance, preferring verbal instructions and orders to a more formal manner of written policies. Furthermore, much of the evidence left behind, and notably with regards to the Holocaust, usually refrained from referring to the process specifically, and used ambiguous language to disguise involvement.  This has provided difficulties in attaining an understanding of the logistics such as the timing of implementation.                                                                                 Despite the complex issues which can prevent a clear understanding of the Holocaust and its causes, historians have formulated a number of interpretations of the Nazi persecution of the Jews, and the reasons for its inception. Their work has tended to fall into two categories of thought. The ‘Intentionalist’ approach tends to focus upon the centrality of Hitler and his ideology for a pure Germany, coupled with his consistent hatred for the Jewish people. As mentioned above, this is a popular approach as it places the guilt firmly at the door of one individual. It does, however, suggest that the mass genocide of the Jews in Europe was a planned and orchestrated intention of Hitler from the beginning of his political career, which has been difficult to prove. The other main approach is known as the ‘Structuralist’ approach. Whilst acknowledging the undisputed role of Hitler in the Nazi state, its advocates a lean towards presenting  the Holocaust as a solution to the ‘Jewish Question’ which developed over time, in response to the individual and distinct circumstances of Nazi Germany. Emphasis is placed upon the fragmentary nature of Nazi leadership, and the initiative shown to interpret Hitler’s desires by lower level local Nazi officials. In short, there was no intention to exterminate the Jewish race at the beginning of Hitler’s tenure, it was an idea that developed over time as situations changed and complicated. The aim of this essay is to understand and respond to the Holocaust from an objective perspective, and discover whether it was a planned and organised series of events, or whether it was a result of distorted and complex interplay of circumstances.

Join now!

         

        In his study of the Third Reich, Geoff Layton suggests that Hitler was “the product, not the creator” of a German society which was permeated with clear and distinct anti-Semitism. He suggests that the emergence of anti-Semitism in Nazi Germany was more a response to intellectual developments and social conditions than something initiated by Hitler individually. This viewpoint is supported in the J.Noakes text, ‘Nazism, The Rise to Power, 1919-45’ which also refers to the growing anti-Semitism within Germany prior to Hitler’s ascension to power. For Noakes, the social dislocation caused by rapid urbanisation of the late 19th Century led to ...

This is a preview of the whole essay