Education, Social Studies, History, Civics, Current Issues

Understanding and Teaching about the European Holocaust

Understanding and Teaching about the European Holocaust

By Joshua Wolk

The European Holocaust remains one of the most studied and debated events in modern human history by historians, philosophers and educators. Only conspiracy theorists question whether the European Holocaust and the extermination of six million Jews happened or happened on that scale. Debate centers on why it happened and whether it should be understood as a unique historical event, a singularity, incomparable to other historical events, or one of a number of 20th century genocides.

As a teacher, I believe what makes the European Holocaust unprecedented is that it was an industrialization of mass murder carried out by the Nazi regime utilizing modern bureaucracy, transportation networks, and mechanized killing center. This allowed the Nazis to create a system of extermination that functioned with an efficiency and scale previously unheard of and not since replicated. Understanding the Holocaust therefore requires recognizing both its place within the broader history of genocide as well as the distinctive features that made it historically unprecedented.

Sadly, genocide is far from a unique phenomenon in human history. Prior to the European Holocaust, societies had engaged in the systematic destruction of ethnic, religious or national groups. The word “genocide” itself was not coined until World War II by the legal scholar Raphael Lemkin, a Jewish refugee to the United States from Poland in 1939. Lemkin did not limit the definition of holocaust to the extermination of European Jewry. In his book Axis Rule in Occupied Europe (1944), he defined genocide as any coordinated plan aimed at destroying the life of a national group including the Ottoman treatment of Armenians during World War I. He included the destruction of cultural, economic, and religious life, not just physical extermination.

Genocidal campaigns attempt to eliminate populations viewed as threatening or undesirable. They are generally fueled by profound ethnic hatred, religious intolerance, political ideology, economic competition, and fears about national security. Studying earlier examples helps teachers and students better understand both the recurring nature of genocide while also understanding the ways in which the European Holocaust differed from other instances of mass violence. An important example of genocide was the Armenian Genocide, “Medz Yeghern” or “Great Catastrophe.” During the first World War, the Ottoman Empire carried out mass deportations and the murder of Armenians resulting in the death of an estimated one to one and a half million people. Communities were uprooted and subjected to violence by soldiers and paramilitary groups. Armenians were removed from their homes and forced to march through the Syrian desert under brutal conditions leading to widespread starvation. Property was confiscated and Armenian cultural institutions were destroyed. In this case, the killing process did not rely on technological systems or industrialized methods. Violence occurred through forced displacement and direct physical attacks carried out across large geographic areas.

Another example that illustrates the recurring nature of genocide, but also differences, is the Rwandan genocide in 1994 when over the course of 100 days the country’s Hutu majority murdered 800,000 members of its Tutsi minority. Radio broadcasts encouraged violence while simultaneously spreading propaganda that portrayed the Tutsi population as unhuman enemies who needed to be eliminated. Local Hutu communities were mobilized to participate and killings were often carried out by rampaging mobs with machetes and other basic weapons. These killing were personal and face-to-face unlike the Armenians who were left to die in the desert or European Jews murdered in concentration death camps.

What makes the European Holocaust unique is not murder, but the system by which Nazi Germany’s genocidal policies was carried out. One of the most significant elements of this system was the extensive use of transportation networks. Millions of victims were deported from cities and villages in countries under Nazi control and railroads were used to transport them across Europe to concentration and extermination camps. These deportations and executions were not random acts of violence but rather were carefully planned and coordinated operations. Trains were scheduled and routes were organized. Detailed records were kept in order to optimize the movement of people. This logistical coordination demonstrates how modern administrative systems were integrated into the machinery and fabric of genocide. Officials working in offices were able to be far removed from the killing sites.

The European Holocaust illustrates how genocide can be carried out, not only by perpetrators with weapons, but also by administrators who help maintain a system designed to maximize efficiency, maintain order, and enable mass murder. Once victims arrived at extermination camps, the killing process itself was organized in a manner that resembled an industrial system. In camps such as Auschwitz, gas chambers were used to quickly and efficiently kill large numbers of people. Victims were often deceived into believing they were entering showers or disinfection facilities and once inside the sealed chambers poison gas was released killing those trapped inside. Prisoners forced to work in the camps were assigned to specialized labor units responsible for removing bodies and operating crematoria expediting the process of killing and disposing of human remains at an efficient rate. This process allowed the Nazis to murder thousands of people each day and millions during the course of the war.

Historian Raul Hilberg, a refugee from Nazi occupied Europe and a World War II veteran serving with the American army, described the mass production of death through industrial means in his work The Destruction of the European Jews (Quadrangle, 1961). Hilberg, a professor at the University of Vermont, argued that the Holocaust was not simply the result of uncontrolled violence but instead was the culmination of a complex bureaucratic process that involved many institutions of the Nazi state. Hilberg explained the destruction of European Jews unfolded through a sequence of stages including identification, isolation, deportation, and extermination. Each stage required the participation of numerous officials who performed specialized roles within the broader system. Police forces enforced anti-Jewish regulations, civil administrators organized deportations, and transportation officials coordinated the movement of trains carrying victims to extermination camps.

It is important for teachers and students to examine survivor accounts to understand how detached bureaucratic systems impacted individuals and to humanize murder on such a grand scale. One of the most influential survivor testimonies is the work of Primo Levi. Levi was an Italian Jewish chemist who survived Auschwitz and in his memoir If This Is a Man, he describes his experiences within the camp system with clarity and reflection. Levi’s background as a scientist shaped the way he observed and interpreted the world around him in a way that is unique from many other stories of survivors. Levi portrayed described the organized and systematic nature operation of the concentration camps where prisoners were reduced to numbers tattooed onto their arms. This stripped them of their identities and allowed for the easier movement, organization, and murder of people. Every aspect of life in the camp was regulated by rules and procedures. Prisoners who were physically strong enough to work were assigned to labor units while others were selected for extermination. Levi’s account highlights how the camp system functioned as a mechanism designed to extract labor but simultaneously facilitated mass death. His observations reveal how the Nazis created a system that treated human beings as expendable resources within a larger machine.

Levi also wrote about the psychological strategies prisoners used in order to survive such harsh conditions. Many prisoners attempted to compartmentalize their experiences. These prisoners learned to focus on immediate survival rather than fully confronting the reality of the system surrounding them. Levi’s reflections illustrate how the industrialized structure of the European Holocaust affected not only the physical lives of prisoners but also played a large part in their mental and emotional experiences. Levi’s writing offers a powerful reminder that behind the bureaucratic machinery of genocide were millions of individual human lives.

The European Holocaust should be understood both as part of the broader history of genocide and as a uniquely industrialized form of mass murder. Genocide itself is not a singular phenomenon in human history. We see this demonstrated by events such as the Armenian and Rwandan genocides. The European Holocaust stands apart not due to the willingness to kill but because of the way the Nazi regime transformed the process of killing into a systematic and industrial enterprise. Through the use of transportation networks, mechanized killing centers and extensive administrative coordination the Nazis created a system capable of exterminating millions of people with unprecedented efficiency. The work of scholars like Raul Hilberg and the reflections of Primo Levi help us to better understand how this system operated. Studying the European Holocaust in this way helps illuminate the dangers that arise when modern systems of power are directed toward destructive and dehumanizing goals.

Rethinking Holocaust Education

Rethinking Holocaust Education

By Ari Mandel

Holocaust education occupies a paradoxical position in modern classrooms. It is one of the most widely taught subjects in social studies and history curricula in secondary schools and colleges, appearing in textbooks, museums, films, and commemorative programs across the world. Yet widespread exposure has not necessarily produced deeper historical understanding. Many students leave these lessons with strong impressions but only a limited grasp of the broader historical context, and of the historical forces that produced the Holocaust. In some cases, repeated exposure can even produce a kind of numbness in which the subject loses the weight it should carry.

The problem is clearly not a lack of exposure, but the way the history is framed and taught. Efforts to extract blunt moral lessons from the Holocaust may be well intentioned, but they risk reducing a complex historical catastrophe to a simplified parable. When history becomes primarily a vehicle for moral messaging, students may disengage or fail to grapple with the deeper questions the event raises.

Effective Holocaust education therefore requires a shift from quantity to quality. Instruction should prioritize historical context, careful analysis of evidence, and deep engagement with the social and political forces that made the genocide possible. Teaching the Holocaust as serious history allows students not only to understand the event itself, but also to examine how genocide develops, compare it with other episodes of mass violence, and evaluate contemporary issues with greater historical awareness.

Visibility Without Understanding

Despite its prominence in school curricula, Holocaust education often produces uneven results. Research and classroom experience suggest that many students retain only a fragmented grasp of the subject. They may recognize familiar symbols such as Auschwitz, Hitler, and concentration camps without understanding the broader context that made the genocide possible. Chronology is often unclear, the ideological foundations of Nazism are poorly understood, and the political and social mechanisms that enabled the Holocaust frequently remain unexplored.

Part of the difficulty lies in how instruction is structured. Lessons often prioritize emotional engagement over analysis. Graphic imagery, survivor testimony, and powerful narratives can leave lasting impressions, but without careful contextualization they may produce reactions without deeper comprehension. Students may remember what they saw or felt without understanding how or why events unfolded.

In some cases, the sheer volume of Holocaust imagery and storytelling has the opposite effect. Rather than strengthening engagement, repeated exposure can create a form of desensitization in which the subject becomes familiar but intellectually distant. Some historians have called this “Holocaust fatigue.” When it occurs, the Holocaust risks becoming just another tragedy rather than a historically specific event shaped by identifiable causes and decisions.

These patterns suggest that more exposure is not necessarily better. Depth of instruction matters more than frequency. A smaller number of carefully structured lessons that emphasize context, evidence, and inquiry may prove more effective than repeated encounters with sanitized and decontextualized narratives. Examined as a complex historical process shaped by ideology, political decisions, bureaucratic structures, and social participation, the Holocaust becomes far more intelligible.

The Problem with Moral Slogans

Attempts to extract blunt moral lessons from the Holocaust often produce the opposite of the intended effect. Teachers understandably want students to leave with a clear ethical message. Yet when the event is reduced to slogans about tolerance or bullying, its complexity disappears. Such framing turns a vast historical catastrophe into a simple moral parable and often produces indifference rather than engagement. More importantly, this framing allows students to distance themselves too easily. If the lesson is that Nazis were uniquely evil, students can reassure themselves that they are nothing like the perpetrators. As long as they are not committing atrocities, the history appears irrelevant. Modern Holocaust scholarship challenges this assumption. The individuals who carried out the Holocaust were not monsters drawn from some separate category of humanity. Most were ordinary people who lived ordinary lives, saw themselves as respectable, and participated in a system that persecuted and murdered millions.

Lieutenant Colonel Douglas Kelley was a United States Army Military Intelligence Corps officer who served as chief psychiatrist at Nuremberg Prison prior to the post-World War II trial of leading Nazis. Kelley examined 22 high ranking officials of the Nazi party, including Hitler’s second-in-command Hermann Goring and his deputy Rudolf Hess to determine whether they were insane and predict if they would suffer a breakdown before and during their trial. In his book, 22 Cells in Nuremberg. A Psychiatrist Examines the Nazi Criminals (London: W. H. Allen, 1947) published after the trial, Kelley argued the defendants did not represent a specifically Nazi pathology, but that “they were simply creatures of their environment, as all humans are.” He believed that under similar circumstances, other people, including Americans might act in the same way. Kelley’s work with the Nazi prisoners is at the core of the recent movie Nuremberg.

Reaching similar conclusions, Hannah Arendt famously described this as the “banality of evil.” Observing Adolf Eichmann’s trial, she argued that genocide was often carried out not by fanatics but by individuals who were disturbingly normal. Eichmann presented himself as a bureaucrat who had simply performed his duties. While controversial, her argument forced historians to confront an unsettling reality: the Holocaust depended not only on ideology but on widespread participation.

Subsequent research reinforced this point. Stanley Milgram’s experiments demonstrated how ordinary individuals could be persuaded to harm others. Christopher Browning’s book Ordinary Men showed how middle-aged reservists, with little prior ideological commitment, became participants in mass murder through a mixture of obedience, peer pressure, and gradual moral accommodation.

Another crucial dimension concerns bystanders. Many people did not directly participate in violence, yet they witnessed persecution and chose not to intervene. Neighbors watched families disappear. Railway workers transported deportees. Civil servants processed the machinery of persecution. Their inaction helped sustain the system. For students, this category is often the most relevant. Few imagine themselves as perpetrators, and many hope they would be rescuers. In reality, most people occupy the space in between.

For Holocaust education, these insights are essential. The goal is not simply to label Nazis as evil, but to examine the social and psychological processes that made participation possible. Violence rarely begins with a single decision. It develops through smaller choices, compromises, and acts of conformity until the unthinkable becomes normalized. Taught this way, the Holocaust becomes not a distant moral fable but a deeply human and troubling historical process.

This approach also shifts the focus from abstract judgment to historical inquiry. Instead of asking whether people in the past were good or evil, students are encouraged to examine how ordinary individuals understood their actions, how institutions shaped behavior, and how social pressures influenced decision making. These questions do not excuse participation in violence, but they make it possible to understand how such participation occurs. In doing so, they bring the history closer to students’ own world, where moral choices are rarely presented in clear or dramatic terms.

What Students Never Learn: Jewish Life Before the Holocaust

Holocaust education often begins with persecution and ends with genocide. While these topics are essential, this framing creates a distorted picture of Jewish history. This problem is compounded by the fact that, for many students, Holocaust lessons may be their first real exposure to Jews or Judaism. Without prior knowledge or personal connection, their initial encounter may come through the lens of Nazi ideology itself. Students are often shown antisemitic caricatures to illustrate prejudice. These materials are important historical evidence, but without a broader context they can unintentionally reinforce the distortions they were meant to expose. With little else to draw on, students may come to understand Jews primarily through the representations created by their persecutors.

Before the Holocaust, Jewish communities across Europe were longstanding and integral parts of the social, cultural, and economic life of many cities and towns. Their traditions had evolved over millennia and supported vibrant intellectual, artistic, and political cultures. Jewish merchants, professionals, writers, musicians, and scholars played visible roles in the life of cities from Moscow to Paris. Political movements ranged from religious traditionalism to socialism and liberalism. Yiddish literature and theater flourished, and newspapers, schools, and community institutions shaped daily life across thousands of communities. This world was not defined solely by persecution. It was a living civilization with its own language, debates, and cultural achievements.

Understanding this world is essential to grasping the magnitude of the Holocaust. The destruction of European Jewry was not only the murder of millions but also the destruction of communities and traditions that had developed over generations. Without this context, students cannot fully understand what was destroyed.

Teaching Jewish life before the Holocaust corrects a deeper distortion. Jewish history is often presented as a sequence of persecutions culminating in genocide, reducing a complex civilization to a narrative of suffering. While antisemitism is part of that history, education should also present the richness of Jewish life that existed long before the Nazis attempted to eradicate it and that ultimately survived their attempt. Too often, students encounter Jews only as victims rather than as participants in a long and complex civilization.

This broader perspective has an additional benefit. When students encounter Jewish life as a living culture, they are better able to recognize the gap between antisemitic stereotypes and historical reality. In this sense, teaching Jewish life before the Holocaust is not a diversion but a necessary foundation for understanding it.

Why Holocaust Education Matters Now

Holocaust education matters not only because of the historical significance of the event itself, but also because the patterns that made it possible continue to appear in other contexts. Antisemitism has often flourished during periods of political instability, economic stress, or cultural anxiety. When individuals or communities explain difficult conditions by blaming vulnerable groups, it reflects a deeper failure to confront underlying problems and often leads to consequences that extend far beyond the targeted minority. In such moments, scapegoating replaces serious engagement with complex realities.

Crises have repeatedly produced movements that seek simple explanations for complex conditions. Economic hardship and rapid social change can generate narratives that attribute national decline to hidden enemies or internal betrayal. In these environments, conspiracy thinking takes hold and blame is redirected outward. Antisemitism has long provided one of the most persistent frameworks for this kind of explanation.

Teaching the Holocaust provides an opportunity to examine how such narratives develop and gain influence. Nazi ideology did not emerge in a vacuum. It drew on long standing traditions of antisemitism, racial theories, and conspiracy myths circulating across Europe, shaped in part by the political and economic crises that followed the first World War. Studied in context, these ideas reveal how prejudice becomes institutionalized and how conspiracy thinking can be translated into policy.

Holocaust education also encourages students to distinguish between different forms of mass violence. Genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing, and crimes against humanity are related but distinct. Examining these categories allows for more precise analysis and comparison without diminishing the Holocaust.

In this sense, Holocaust education serves an important civic function. Students learn how propaganda reshapes public opinion, how institutions become instruments of persecution, and how narratives of blame take hold. The goal is not to draw simplistic parallels, but to equip students with the tools to recognize dangerous patterns.

Understanding the Holocaust therefore requires more than memorization. It requires examining how prejudice becomes normalized, how conspiracy thinking spreads, and how societies respond to crisis by directing anger toward vulnerable groups. When approached this way, Holocaust education becomes not only an exercise in remembrance but a framework for understanding how societies can descend into exclusion and violence.

Conclusion

Teaching the Holocaust presents educators with a difficult but essential responsibility. The challenge is not simply to present the facts, but to ensure that students understand the processes that made the genocide possible. Holocaust education can easily fall into repetition, emotional overload, or simplified moral messaging that leaves students with impressions but little analysis.

A more effective approach places historical inquiry at the center. Students should examine the ideological roots of antisemitism, the political and economic conditions that allowed extremism to flourish, and the structures that enabled genocide. This includes attention to the broader context in which Nazism emerged, including the aftermath of the First World War and the crises that followed. They should also confront the role of ordinary individuals, bystanders, and incremental choices in shaping events.

Equally important is situating the Holocaust within the broader history of Jewish life. The destruction of European Jewry cannot be understood solely through persecution. Without that context, the scale of the loss is diminished.

Ultimately, the purpose of Holocaust education is not only remembrance but understanding. Teaching the Holocaust as serious history allows students to grapple with the complexities of human behavior and the fragility of modern societies. It equips them to recognize patterns of scapegoating, conspiracy thinking, and political extremism before they escalate into something far more dangerous.

Remarks by German Chancellor Merkel, U.S. President Obama, and Holocaust Survivor Elie Wiesel at the Buchenwald Concentration Camp

Source: https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/remarks-president-obama-german-chancellor-merkel-and-elie-wiesel-buchenwald-concent

In June 2009, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, United States President Barack Obama, and Holocaust Survivor Elie Wiesel spoke at a memorial service at the Buchenwald Concentration camp near Weimar, Germany. Wiesel was fifteen years old when he was imprisoned by the Nazis, first at Auschwitz, and then at Buchenwald These are excerpts from their speeches.

CHANCELLOR MERKEL: “Unimaginable horror, shock — there are no words to adequately describe what we feel when we look at the suffering inflicted so cruelly upon so many people here and in other concentration and extermination camps under National Socialist terror. I bow my head before the victims. We, the Germans, are faced with the agonizing question how and why — how could this happen? How could Germany wreak such havoc in Europe and the world? It is therefore incumbent upon us Germans to show an unshakeable resolve to do everything we can so that something like this never happens again.

On the 25th of January, the presidents of the associations of former inmates at the concentration camps presented their request to the public, and this request closes with the following words: “The last eyewitness appeal to Germany, to all European states, and to the international community to continue preserving and honoring the human gift of remembrance and commemoration into the future. We ask young people to carry on our struggle against Nazi ideology, and for a just, peaceful and tolerant world; a world that has no place for anti-Semitism, racism, xenophobia, and right-wing extremism.”

This appeal of the survivors clearly defines the very special responsibility we Germans have to shoulder with regard to our history. And for me, therefore, there are three messages that are important today. First, let me emphasize, we Germans see it as past of our country’s raison d’être to keep the everlasting memory alive of the break with civilization that was the Shoah. Only in this way will we be able to shape our future. I am therefore very grateful that the Buchenwald memorial has always placed great emphasis on the dialogue with younger people, to conversations with eyewitnesses, to documentation, and a broad-based educational program. Second, it is most important to keep the memory of the great sacrifices alive that had to be made to put an end to the terror of National Socialism and to liberate its victims and to rid all people of its yoke . . .

Third, here in Buchenwald I would like to highlight an obligation placed on us Germans as a consequence of our past: to stand up for human rights, to stand up for rule of law, and for democracy. We shall fight against terror, extremism, and anti-Semitism. And in the awareness of our responsibility we shall strive for peace and freedom, together with our friends and partners in the United States and all over the world.

PRESIDENT OBAMA: “More than half a century later, our grief and our outrage over what happened have not diminished. I will not forget what I’ve seen here today. I’ve known about this place since I was a boy, hearing stories about my great uncle, who was a very young man serving in World War II. He was part of the 89th Infantry Division, the first Americans to reach a concentration camp. They liberated Ohrdruf, one of Buchenwald’s sub-camps. … He returned from his service in a state of shock saying little and isolating himself for months on end from family and friends, alone with the painful memories that would not leave his head. And as we see — as we saw some of the images here, it’s understandable that someone who witnessed what had taken place here would be in a state of shock.

My great uncle’s commander, General Eisenhower, understood this impulse to silence. He had seen the piles of bodies and starving survivors and deplorable conditions that the American soldiers found when they arrived, and he knew that those who witnessed these things might be too stunned to speak about them or be able — be unable to find the words to describe them; that they might be rendered mute in the way my great uncle had. And he knew that what had happened here was so unthinkable that after the bodies had been taken away, that perhaps no one would believe it. And that’s why he ordered American troops and Germans from the nearby town to tour the camp. He invited congressmen and journalists to bear witness and ordered photographs and films to be made. And he insisted on viewing every corner of these camps so that — and I quote — he could “be in a position to give first-hand evidence of these things if ever in the future there develops a tendency to charge these allegations merely to propaganda.”

We are here today because we know this work is not yet finished. To this day, there are those who insist that the Holocaust never happened — a denial of fact and truth that is baseless and ignorant and hateful. This place is the ultimate rebuke to such thoughts; a reminder of our duty to confront those who would tell lies about our history. Also to this day, there are those who perpetuate every form of intolerance — racism, anti-Semitism, homophobia, xenophobia, sexism, and more — hatred that degrades its victims and diminishes us all. In this century, we’ve seen genocide. We’ve seen mass graves and the ashes of villages burned to the ground; children used as soldiers and rape used as a weapon of war. This places teaches us that we must be ever vigilant about the spread of evil in our own time, that we must reject the false comfort that others’ suffering is not our problem and commit ourselves to resisting those who would subjugate others to serve their own interests . . .

When the American GIs arrived they were astonished to find more than 900 children still alive, and the youngest was just three years old. And I’m told that a couple of the prisoners even wrote a Buchenwald song that many here sang. Among the lyrics were these: “…whatever our fate, we will say yes to life, for the day will come when we are free…in our blood we carry the will to live and in our hearts, in our hearts — faith.”

ELIE WIESEL: “As I came here today it was actually a way of coming and visiting my father’s grave – but he had no grave. His grave is somewhere in the sky. This has become in those years the largest cemetery of the Jewish people. The day he died was one of the darkest in my life. He became sick, weak, and I was there. I was there when he suffered. I was there when he asked for help, for water. I was there to receive his last words. But I was not there when he called for me, although we were in the same block; he on the upper bed and I on the lower bed. He called my name, and I was too afraid to move. All of us were. And then he died. I was there, but I was not there. And I thought one day I will come back and speak to him, and tell him of the world that has become mine. I speak to him of times in which memory has become a sacred duty of all people of good will . . .

What can I tell him that the world has learned?

When I was liberated in 1945, April 11, by the American army, somehow many of us were convinced that at least one lesson will have been learned – that never again will there be war; that hatred is not an option, that racism is stupid; and the will to conquer other people’s minds or territories or aspirations, that will is meaningless . .

But again, the world hasn’t. Had the world learned, there would have been no Cambodia and no Rwanda and no Darfur and no Bosnia. Will the world ever learn? I think that is why Buchenwald is so important – as important, of course, but differently as Auschwitz. It’s important because here the large – the big camp was a kind of international community. People came there from all horizons –

political, economic, culture. The first globalization essay, experiment, were made in Buchenwald. And all that was meant to diminish the humanity of human beings . . .

Memory must bring people together rather than set them apart. Memories here not to sow anger in our hearts, but on the contrary, a sense of solidarity that all those who need us. What else can we do except invoke that memory so that people everywhere who say the 21st century is a century of new beginnings, filled with promise and infinite hope, and at times profound gratitude to all those who believe in our task, which is to improve the human condition.

The Rise of the Führer

The Rise of the Führer

Raymond Villegas

Regarded as one of the most notorious dictators, Adolf Hitler has cemented their place within history. When generally speaking of Hitler, negative connotations are often placed; Hitler is seen as a cruel dictator, responsible for the countless lost lives of the Jews. However, not much is talked about Hitler’s leadership and speaking skills that took over the German hearts. This historiography paper is not meant to justify, endorse, or celebrate Hitler’s actions, but rather, focus on how Hitler used propaganda to take advantage of Germany and allow for the Nazi regime. Throughout different monographs, they showcase Hitler as an evil dictator, while other monographs go against the idea that Hitler was a villain. Instead, many modern-day monographs acknowledge the methods Hitler used that led to some Germans painting Hitler seen as their savior. Although people and their history books have perspectives on who’s the true villain of the second World War, it must be remembered that every villain is a hero in their own eyes.

Generally, Adolf Hitler is mostly known for his cruel deeds; many modern historians recognize Hitler as a genius who used propaganda against weak Germans to his advantage. George Stein’s Hitler (1966), St. Martin’s Hitler: A study in Personality and Politics (1979), and Alan Bullock’s Hitler a study in Tyranny (1955), all provide historical insight on how Hitler rose to power and how events shaped historians’ and citizens’ views on Hitler. Within the three monographs, the authors take a different approach to examine Hitler’s actions, rise to power, personality, and social impact in light of German history and the second World War. In some cases, Hitler was praised by some Germans; modern day monographs acknowledge the praise, but speak on how Hitler was actually just a cruel man. Within the monographs, there is a common theme found; Hitler is the root of evil and nothing more. The authors of the different monographs also explain how Hitler would lie in his autobiography Mein Kampf. Stein, Carr, and Bullock all criticize Mein Kampf and reveal how Hitler would strategically exaggerate events to appeal to the public. Despite the Second World War happening decades ago, monographs are being written to showcase the cruel and upbringing of the Hitler regime. Although the upbringing of the Nazi regime was very cruel, it has been acknowledged that Hitler was a phenomenal leader- with an amazing display of leadership and propaganda skills. In no way shape or form are the monographs trying to justify the horrors that Hitler brought, but to educate the readers how a man, equipped with proper leadership, can rise to power through propaganda, manipulation, and greed.

With Stein’s monograph, Hitler, scholars are able to reshape how Hitler is perceived. Stein offers readers both sides of Hitler’s regime upbringing, showcasing both the negative and positive tales of Hitler’s regime. As mentioned and emphasized earlier, historians think that Hitler was a purely evil man. Although this is true for the most part for most scholars and the general audience, Stein’s monograph acknowledges and praises Hitler’s work as a leader. It has to be remembered that Stein is not praising Hitler for the genocides and the wars, but showing how Hitler’s excellent manipulative skills allowed him to gain control in a weak Germany. As their monograph develops, Stein gives readers different stories and scenarios that aids in their understanding of Hitler. Within these stories, readers are able to understand Hitler’s childhood and his development in German politics. With this in mind, Stein allows scholars to analyze how

Hitler aided Germany, but also caused plenty of chaos. However, Stein’s monograph points towards the idea that Hitler was actually praised in Germany. Especially after the first war, the Germans needed a savior, which many of the Germans found in Hitler. Despite the many positive talks, Stein also talks about the cruel stories of Hitler.

Within Stein’s Hitler, Stein offers three different views on Hitler. Stein gives insight about Hitler’s regime through Hitler’s own words, through the opinion of his contemporaries, and through retrospective.^[1] According to Stein, he mentions that Hitler regarded himself as a great man, nonetheless, the historian Stein recognizes both positive and negative greatness of Hitler’s rise.^[2] As mentioned previously in the introduction, Stein analyzes Hitler’s words to understand how the villain of the story viewed himself as the hero. Even though the different ideas that Hitler was a monster, Hitler’s perspective on himself was nothing short of great. With the help of Stein’s Hitler, Stein’s monograph contributes toward an understanding of both sides of Hitler’s power; the devoted and the non-believers.

Within the first part of Hitler, readers can understand how Hitler rose to power through the eyes of the man himself. Inside this section, readers and scholars alike can learn about Hitler through the way that he expresses himself. By analyzing Hitler’s word choices and actions, Stein helps shed light on the hatred, the greed, and manipulation that led to Hitler’s rise. When it came to tactics and propaganda, Hitler is credited to be a smart man; Stein blames most of Hitler’s ideologies on generalized anxiety, frustration, and the need to find his own identity.³ In order to understand Hitler and his successes, historians must examine the techniques and methods that Hitler used. More importantly, it is important the propaganda and leadership skills that tricked a nation into believing the Nazi regime. In order to understand Hitler’s techniques and methods, Mein Kampf can be studied to understand how Hitler gained the trust of the public. Despite being seen as a fearless and ever powerful dictator, Hitler paints himself in a different way in his autobiography, Mein Kampf. Within this autobiography, Hitler portrays himself as a poor, struggling student who diligently earned his meager by hard work.^[3] Here, readers can see the comparisons of Stein’s work and Hitler’s own. Stein’s monograph starts off criticizing Hitler’s autobiography and calls out Hitler for manipulating people for sympathy. Hitler would use sympathy to relate to the millions of Germans who were poor and affected by the First World War. In reality, this was all a propaganda tactic as Stein claims that Hitler was born into a middle-class family that provided everything he needed. Tying back to the idea of spreading propaganda, Stein argues that Hitler would make himself appeal to the Germans. Especially coming off, and losing, the war, Germans faced poverty and seeing their newfound hero go through similar circumstances gave them a false sense of sympathy; hope that a poor child can achieve anything with hard work. Being a manipulator, patience and false sense of sympathy were key techniques to Hitler’s rise. With a combination of coercion and false promises, Hitler managed to force through the Reichstag laws that allowed him to deviate from the constitution, whenever he thought it necessary.^[4]

Although Hitler had various leadership techniques, his sense of propaganda enabled him to appeal to the Germans. According to Stein, Hitler used propaganda to reach greater masses of people with a lower intellectual level.⁶ In other words, Hitler found a way to understand the general emotion of the public and used it to his advantage. Hitler would strategically use this understanding to convince lower intellectual Germans that his ideology matched theirs. With the help of Stein’s arguments and monographs, readers are able to understand how propaganda

played a major role in Hitler’s success. Although Hitler’s propaganda can be seen as a terrible tactic, it shows how Hitler’s master plan of manipulation enabled him to get control of the masses through his ideologies.

In Section 1, Part 5 of Hitler, Stein explains how Hitler rose to power through his hatred for the Jews. Stein refers back to Mein Kampf to show how Hitler’s hatred for the Jews helped him gain the support of the public. Through brainwashing and public manipulation, Hitler was able to put the blame of the war on the Jews. In this aspect, Hitler can be painted as a genius, as his usage of patriotism enabled him to convince the Germans that they must be prepared to be ready to lay down their lives for their country.^[5] Stein highlighted patriotism as a positive trait, as Hitler viewed himself as a leader who would do anything for his country. With a false sense of patriotism, Hitler would cleverly pick and blame people to convince Germans that they should support his cause

When the topic of Hitler rises, there is a mixed bag of reviews. By this, historians, as well as the general public, view Hitler as evil reincarnated. However, Stein argues that many Germans had a positive outlook on Hitler. Despite being a manipulator, liar, and cruel, Stein discusses how sources claim that Hitler was charming, even endearing; that he was sensitive and capable.^[6] Hitler is generally regarded as an evil dictator; with the help of Stein, historians understand a new side of Hitler and his characteristics. Within Stein’s monograph, it was found that followers viewed Hitler as a genius who was organized and cared for his fellow companions.⁹ Stein offered a perspective that painted Hitler as a person who seemed to care about the welfare of others.

Although society views Hitler’s psychopathic personality as the root for evil, many of Hitler’s followers praised his personality to make him appear as a genius.^[7] Whether the persona be artificial or genuine, Hitler would use his likeable persona to brainwash the German nation.

William Carr’s Hitler: A Study in Personality and Politics presents Hitler in the light of modern historical science. Despite this monograph being written in a different time period, Stein and Carr both agree that Hitler’s expertise in manipulation and mind control enabled him to gain control of Germany. Similar to Stein, Carr believes that Hitler cast a spell over millions of Germans desperately seeking reassurance at a time of unprecedented crisis.^[8] Despite both monographs being written years apart, one thing stays the same- Hitler brainwashed. Hitler was well known for his leadership and manipulation tactics, many of his notable traits include the usage of dogmatic assertion, repetition, biting sarcasm and emotional appeal to win over his followers.¹² Going back to Stein’s claim, most of the Germans who appealed to Hitler’s words were those lower- and middle-class people; specifically, the lower-class intellectuals.

With this in mind, readers are able to understand how Hitler’s main followers came from the lower levels of society, those of which, that lacked the proper education. Carr sheds light on how the middle-class people yearn for a father figure, and Hitler used that to his advantage. Hitler perfectly created his persona around the idea that he was the father figure that was able to support Germany in times of need and the Germans were manipulated into believing it. Similar to Stein’s approach, Carr argues that Hitler’s targeted propaganda allowed Hitler to take over Germany. Carr praises Hitler for his use of propaganda, as he claims that Hitler had an extraordinary instinct and understanding of it.¹³ Being a master of propaganda isn’t an easy feat, as Hitler would perfectly cater in his speeches and arguments to appeal to the Germans. With this in mind, Carr argues that Hitler knew what the general appeal was and used it to negotiations; Hitler tricked the people of Germany and countless people into believing in him.

Going back to Mein Kampf, the autobiography is once again being called out for its fabrication and lies. By this, Carr also criticized Mein Kampf for painting Hitler’s fake persona and upbringing as a fabricated story. Hitler would complain about his poor life- when in reality, he had favorable conditions growing up. The fabrication of Hitler’s autobiography was done on purpose, Hitler once again wanted to appeal to the middle and lower class. Stein limited his view to just the German lower and middle class, while Carr gives more insight on how Hitler manipulated the government to come into control.

Carr provides a new perspective on Hitler’s persona. With their new claim, Carr argues that Hitler is not the one to fully blame for many events in history. However, the ones to blame are shifted towards Hitler’s accomplices. Although the Nazi regime and motives were Hitler’s vision, Hitler only provided the foundation for the plans. In other words, Hitler provided the blueprints but his accomplices did the work to carry out the plans. Historians can see this as Hitler and his associates were not in possession of a blueprint for aggression as the Nuremberg Tribunal believed.¹⁴ In reality, one of Hitler’s goals was to avoid

However, this is not to excuse any of Hitler’s plans or motives, but to acknowledge that Hitler was not the sole person responsible for many of the crimes. Carr’s monograph reveals new details about Hitler’s personality. Prior to Carr, little to nothing was known about Hitler. With the help of modern history, historians can learn more about Hitler’s complex personality. Prior studies believed that Hitler was a person with the Oedipus complex; when a son loves his mother while showing hatred for his father. With recent studies and monographs, historians concluded that this is not fully true.

Carr argues how Hitler never really loved his mother, and how he really never hated his father.^[9] Instead, it was found that Hitler would have to constantly reassure his mother, which caused him to be spoiled and dependent on her. Carr refers back to Stein, as they agree that Hitler’s personality came to be a result of trauma and not the Oedipal complex.¹⁷ Hitler’s personality isn’t seen as an Oedipus complex anymore, instead, it can be seen as a man imprisoned in a shame-guilt cycle. With the help of new Historical evidence, it can be confirmed that Hitler experienced his major identity crisis between the age of eighteen and twenty.¹⁸

Since Hitler was dependent on his mother, her death caused Hitler to break away from the world. Historians point towards the idea that Hitler’s time in the military played a role in shaping Hitler’s trauma. Within his military time, Hitler would have a personality crisis and tried to pinpoint a scapegoat for all of the problems being faced. By using brainwashing techniques, Hitler would help Germans to find a way to cope with their troubles instead. By manipulating the Germans, Hitler was able to overcome his trauma by offering to aid the weak Germans.

With Bullock’s Hitler: A Study in Tyranny, Bullock explores the role of Hitler and how he rose to power. Bullock begins his monograph with two questions in mind, what great part did Hitler play in the Third Reich and how did Hitler rise to power? Bullock takes a different approach as Bullock’s theme is to study the dictator and not the dictatorship. In other words, Bullock is focusing on the personality and characteristics of Hitler instead of the evil deeds committed by the Nazi regime. Much like the previous authors, Bullock criticizes Mein Kampf as he believes that Hitler makes his story much more dramatic than it actually was. By being overdramatic, Hitler seeks to gain the sympathy of the German citizens. Bullock explains that Hitler attempted to be seen as a poor child, but he agrees with Stein and Carr that this is not true. In line with Carr, Bullock debunks the idea of the Oedipus complex and explains it as a more dramatic response by Hitler. With constant fabricated stories, Hitler is seen trying to gain the support of the Germans by gaining petty points on his upbringing. This tactic was one of Hitler’s most common tactics, as he would relate back to German struggles.

With Bullock’s monograph, readers are able to understand how Hitler would often falsely sympathize with the public. Although Hitler wrote about Vienna’s working-class misery, it was evident that his words produced no sympathy.^[10] Despite Hitler showing false support and sympathy, it was used to show how he attempted to care. One of the tactics Hitler used was to learn the working-class hatred towards the higher class. By understanding this concept, Hitler used this to his advantage to gain the support of the working class. Bullock tells readers that Hitler found the solution in the “discovery” that the working men were the victims of a deliberate system.²⁰ In other words, Hitler’s discovery of working men led towards his attempts to gain the support of the poor. As previously stated earlier, the lower class was also seen as having lower intellectual abilities, Hitler’s main targeted group.

A new study shows that Hitler did not entirely hate the Jews, but fabricated the propaganda to appeal to the Germans. In Mein Kampf, Hitler would have pages that references Jews. However, in the devoted pages towards Jews, Hitler failed to provide any facts to support his reasoning to hate the Jews. Although the Jewish population was the main victims of the Nazi regime, historians learn that Hitler used the Jews as a fantasy where he projected all that he hates and fears. With recent studies, it shows that the Jewish people were seen as the scapegoats for Germany. In other words, Hitler used Jews as scapegoats to find closure after losing resources and power after the first war. Hitler wisely used this tactic, as he knew finding a scapegoat would allow him to gain support of the Germans.

Hitler is praised for his leadership skills, but Bullock reveals that Hitler’s nationalism was both unoriginal and highly motivated by propaganda. By this, the ideas that Hitler executed were not Hitler’s own original ideas. Instead of being original, Hitler was able to derive previous ideas from old sources for his movement.^[11] Hitler is depicted to be seen as a mastermind, when he really has no originality in himself; Hitler was able to use his sources and prior ideas to his advantage and appeal to the public. Studies prove that Hitler believed propaganda was key to success, as Hitler observed the successes of English propaganda. Many of the monographs talk about how Hitler emerged from fixed ideas and prejudices, stemming from his traumatic life.

Hitler is seen as a genius for his ability to use propaganda and target the right people. Throughout the monographs seen within this paper, propaganda is a key talking point in every single one of them. The three authors are all in unison to agree that propaganda was the main driving force within Hitler’s rise to power. As mentioned earlier, Hitler had no original ideas, but properly presented himself to gain support. Hitler’s genius was seen when it was time to exploit the weaknesses of the Germans. With recent studies, historians found that Hitler came to know Germany and the Germans in hopes of exploiting their weaknesses. By 1933, Hitler had spoken to almost every single town in Germany, targeting the lower class towns the most. By using his powerful words and leadership skills, Hitler aimed to appear as the hero Germany desperately needed. Bullock provides a new insight on Hitler’s rise to power, as his advantage was that he became a well-supported public figure.

Hitler rose to power through the powerful messages sent out through his political movements. In order to properly understand the rise of Hitler, the Nazi regime and their movement must be analyzed from a psychological perspective. Hitler’s strength came through his gaining of the public trust, where Hitler properly knew what the masses needed. During his movement, Hitler explains his movement must avoid everything which may lessen or weaken its power of influencing the masses.^[12] In other words, Hitler would avoid any obstacles that might have hindered his image or the image that the Nazi regime was trying to portray. Bullock explains in his monograph that Hitler uses constant repetition which succeeded in imprinting an idea on the memory of a crowd.^[13] Hitler manipulated the collective memory of the messages, as Hitler would enforce specific memories towards the masses. By enforcing specific memories, Hitler would manipulate the feelings that the masses had towards the Nazi regime. Repetition was seen as key towards Hitler’s success as Stein reveals that Hitler would constantly repeat the same idea over and over.

With this constant repetition, Hitler left a footprint within the crowds. Hitler’s best propaganda and manipulation skills were shown within his speeches. In his speeches, Bullock reveals that Hitler would use specific, emotion triggering words to get the Germans on his side. By emotion triggering, historians learn that Hitler would employ verbal violence and repeat the words “smash”, “force”, “ruthless”, to evoke an effect on the audience. With the constant repetition drilled in the Germans, historians found the effectiveness of Hitler’s speeches to actually impact society into believing that he was correct. Prior to the Nazi regime, Hitler was unknown to the large general public. The Germans were unaware who Hitler was, but he had recently become a familiar figure, thanks to a publicity campaign.²⁴ Bullock explains how

Hitler’s popularity caused him to attract the attention of those who controlled the political funds from heavy industry and big businesses. Looking back at Hitler’s regime, historians learn that Hitler needed the support of both industrialists and big businesses to be able to control the funds for his organization and propaganda.

Within Bullock’s study of Hitler, Bullock discusses how Hitler’s personality was key in making him an effective leader. Regardless of the many troubles or situations that the Nazis found themselves in, Hitler was what kept his men together. Bullock establishes Hitler as a man with a striking leadership quality, a leader that was devoted to his soldiers and goals. Hitler would never let go, never lose faith in himself, and communicated this with his comrades- which ended up boosting their spirits. History does not credit Hitler for his leadership, even though he was the sole reason that the Nazi regime was not abolished sooner. Hitler was the glue within his army, as his constant leadership and positive outlook was a key factor in boosting esteem within the regime. Even while he was in prison, Hitler did not lose faith and constantly reassured his supporters. However, Hitler proves that a cruel movement can gain support through a person’s top tier leadership qualities.

Hitler’s tactics included a mixture of bribery, appeals, and threats. All throughout the German streets there were slogans plastered all over the walls and posters showcasing any sort of help to boost Hitler’s reputation. Stein and Carr explained how Hitler appealed to the middle- and lower-class Germans, but Bullock reveals that Hitler also aimed to target respectable bourgeois parties like the democrats. Much like the Germans of the time, the different political parties were crying out with crippling anxiety and depression. Hitler once again took advantage by offering a brand of extremism. Bullock mentions how Hitler never forgot his main theme in Mein Kampf, as he always targeted the masses, since “possession of the streets is key to the power in the state.”²⁵ Hitler was a genius when it came time to target the masses, as he knew that the lower-class citizens, or streets, were crucial in the development of his regime.

After analyzing the three monographs, the historians are able to offer scholars and readers a new perspective on Hitler. Collective memory enables people to view Hitler as this villain, but fail to acknowledge the incredible grit and determination it took to become a leader. People often mistake Hitler’s manipulation as a negative trait, but the monographs shifted this view to be seen as Hitler’s outstanding traits. Manipulation is tied with a negative connotation, but when used wisely, manipulation can be seen as a positive trait. Although the manipulation didn’t lead to positive outcomes, it shows how it can be used to gain the support of masses. Through manipulation and propaganda, Hitler was able to accomplish great features. To convince thousands of people to follow a regime is outstanding, and Hitler had all the tools to convince the Germans. The monographs acknowledge Hitler’s skill as a genius trait, since many leaders would stumble when trying to convince the mass millions.

The new studies of Hitler coming to light, scholars are able to understand the true nature of Hitler. Before these monographs, historians had different ideas and outlooks on Hitler’s life- many of which mistakenly took Hitler’s personality as a result of the Oedipus complex. With the help of Stein, Carr, and Bullock, historians reframe their thinking of Hitler and how his personality came to be. It has been found that Hitler was not a product of the Oedipus complex, but a result from childhood trauma that came from his dependence on his mother. Contrary to popular belief, Hitler did not love his mother- debunking the Oedipus complex. To further debunk the Oedipus complex labeled on Hitler, Bullock mentions how Hitler did not hate his father but over exaggerated his story.

Prior to any monograph or stories, the only source scholars had on Hitler was through his autobiography. Although Hitler’s autobiography had over dramatic events, scholars were able to understand a glimpse of Hitler’s life. The three monographs help historians understand that Hitler’s autobiography is not entirely accurate. As mentioned before, Hitler would exaggerate his stories to manipulate sympathy from the public. Modern day monographs help reveal the true nature of Mein Kampf and expose some of the lies. All through-out the monographs, it is apparent that they credit Hitler’s rise to power due to his genius use of propaganda. Hitler would use his propaganda to target the middle and lower class who were desperately trying to find a hero. All three authors explain how Hitler painted himself as the hero and would lie in his autobiography to appeal to the people of Germany. The monographs shift history’s understanding of Hitler’s tactics by showcasing how Hitler used the desperation of the German people to his advantage.

In Bullock’s monograph, Bullock paints Hitler as a clueless person who used luck and manipulation to gain the trust of millions. Hitler had an incredible array of leadership skills and knew how to persuade people. There are countless examples of historical figures that had a part to play in the war, such as other Nazi members and the other Axis powers. As mentioned before, Hitler was the one to be the leader since he had the vocal and persuasive skills to be the leader. The other Nazi higher ranking members and Axis powers had similar ideas, but they just needed Hitler’s platform to reach new heights. The monographs show how Hitler’s manipulation, greed, and childhood trauma, allowed him to become the leader that society knows today. Hitler kept his ideas and did not back down from them, showing leadership qualities in tragic events. Although scholars and historians learn that most of Hitler’s ideas were not originally his, Hitler used prior platforms to his advantage.

Collective memories paint Hitler as a villain, but history must consider his genius as a leader that manipulated his rise to power. As Stein previously mentioned, historians must recognize the positive and negative aspects of the historical figure and the same must be done for Hitler. Although Hitler is seen as mostly negative, the monographs listed here enable scholars to analyze the rise of Hitler and compare it to other politicians. Despite being the villain in countless stories, Hitler is a hero in the eyes of the manipulated and gullible.

History as a Mirror: Connecting Hitler’s Rise to Modern Challenges

History does not just live within the textbooks or within a teacher’s lesson; history can be seen repeating in our modern-day life. A single man’s voice was able to manipulate and gain the attention of millions of blind supporters, a pattern that can be seen repeating constantly. Even the craziest of ideas can be accomplished through manipulation, propaganda, and other tactics. The historiography paper, The Rise of the Führer, can be used to analyze how Hitler’s tactics gave his voice the power to control the blind masses to go against the Jews. Teaching the rise of Hitler is important in any school curriculum where students are exposed to ideas that involve authoritarianism, manipulation, and dictatorship. Countless politicians and world leaders saw the warning signs of Hitler but failed to really put a halt to him. Relating it to modern day, the world is slowly seeing another Hitler on the rise: Donald Trump.

Donald Trump is seen using the same tactics as Hitler: manipulation, propaganda, and borderline authoritarianism. For educators, it is important to not only teach about how Hitler rose to power but also connect it to modern-day politicians like Trump. Students need to be educated on the rise of dictators and the consequences that can be faced if they are not stopped. Although The Rise of the Führer does not provide a solution on how to stop a dictator, the paper analyzes how easily the masses can be controlled.

References

Bullock, A. (1991). Hitler: A study in tyranny. HarperCollins.

Carr, W. (1978). Hitler: A study in personality and politics. Hodder Education.

Hitler, A. (2015). Mein Kampf (R. Manheim, Trans.). CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform. (Original work published 1925)

Stein, G. (1968). Hitler. Spectrum Books.

[1] George Stein’s Hitler, 14

[2] Stein’s Hitler Introduction, 1

[3] Stein’s, 4

[4] Stein, 13

[5] Stein, 78

[6] Stein, 88

[7] Stein, 106

[8] William Carr’s Hitler: A Study in Personality and Politics

[9] Carr, 152

[10] Bullock, 32

[11] Bullock 40

[12] Bullock, 60

[13] Bullock, 63