My Revision Notes - Edexcel AS - A - Barbara Warnock

Acknowledgements
The Publishers would like to thank the following for permission to

reproduce copyright material.
pp.69 & 75 From THE ORIGINS OF THE SECOND WORLD WAR
by A.J.P. Taylor (Hamish Hamilton 1961, Penguin Books 1964, 1987,
1991) Copyright © A J P Taylor, 1961, 1963. Reproduced by
permission of Penguin Books Ltd; pp.73 & 76 From THE THIRD
REICH IN POWER by Richard Evans (Penguin Books 2003).
Copyright © Richard Evans 2005. Reproduced by permission of
Penguin Books Ltd.
Every effort has been made to trace all copyright holders, but if any
have been inadvertently overlooked, the Publishers will be pleased
to make the necessary arrangements at the first opportunity.
Although every effort has been made to ensure that website
addresses are correct at time of going to press, Hodder Education
cannot be held responsible for the content of any website mentioned
in this book. It is sometimes possible to find a relocated web page by
typing in the address of the home page for a website in the URL
window of your browser.
Hachette UK’s policy is to use papers that are natural, renewable
and recyclable products and made from wood grown in sustainable
forests. The logging and manufacturing processes are expected to
conform to the environmental regulations of the country of origin.
Orders: please contact Bookpoint Ltd, 130 Milton Park, Abingdon,
Oxon OX14 4SE. Telephone: +44 (0)1235 827720. Fax: +44 (0)1235
400454. Email [email protected] Lines are open from 9
a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday to Saturday, with a 24-hour message
answering service. You can also order through our website:
www.hoddereducation.co.uk
ISBN: 978 1 4718 7649 3
eISBN: 978 1 4718 7650 9

© Barbara Warnock 2017
First published in 2017 by
Hodder Education,
An Hachette UK Company
Carmelite House
50 Victoria Embankment
London EC4Y 0DZ
www.hoddereducation.co.uk
Impression number 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Year 2021 2020 2019 2018 2017
All rights reserved. Apart from any use permitted under UK copyright
law, no part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in
any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including
photocopying and recording, or held within any information storage
and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher
or under licence from the Copyright Licensing Agency Limited.
Further details of such licences (for reprographic reproduction) may
be obtained from the Copyright Licensing Agency Limited, Saffron
House, 6–10 Kirby Street, London EC1N 8TS.
Cover photo © Christian Mueringer / Alamy Stock Photo
Illustrations by Integra
Typeset in Bembo Std Regular by Integra Software Services Pvt.
Ltd., Pondicherry, India
Printed in Spain
A catalogue record for this title is available from the British Library.
My Revision Planner
Introduction
1 The Weimar Republic, 1918–33

The creation of a republic, 1918–19
The Weimar Constitution
The features of the Weimar Republic’s constitution
Opposition to the government: the legacy of war and defeat
Economic crises, 1918–23
Government responses to economic crisis
Opposition to the government: political extremism, 1918–23 (part
1)
Opposition to the government: political extremism, 1918–23 (part
2)
Controlling extremism, 1918–23
Policies for recovery, 1924–29 – the ‘Golden Years’
Social and cultural attitudes and policies
The impact of and responses to the Great Depression, 1929–32
The collapse of democracy, 1930–33 (part 1)
The growth of Nazi support
The collapse of democracy, 1930–33 (part 2)
Exam focus
2 Nazi Germany, 1933–45

Establishing a dictatorship
The nature of Nazi government, 1933–39
Support for the Nazi regime
Opposition and dissent
Terror and repression
Nazi racial policies
Nazi policies towards women
Nazi education and cultural policies
Nazi economic policies, 1933–39
Government in wartime
The war economy
The domestic impact of the war
The ‘Final Solution’ and the Holocaust
Exam focus
3 Historical interpretations: How far was Hitler’s foreign

policy responsible for the Second World War?
The influence of German history on Nazi foreign policy
Hitler’s role in shaping foreign policy
The contribution of other nations to the outbreak of the war
Why did Germany invade Poland in 1939?
Domestic reasons for the German invasion of Poland
Exam focus (A-level)
Exam focus (AS-level)
4 Democratic government in West Germany, 1945–89

Return to democratic government: the creation of the Federal
Republic of Germany, 1945–49
The denazification policies of the Western Allies, 1945–49
Establishing democracy from 1949
Consolidation under Adenauer and Erhard, 1949–66
Economic recovery and the ‘economic miracle’, 1945–66
The nature of support for democracy in the FRG, 1949–66
Maintaining political stability under Brandt, Schmidt and Kohl,
1966–89
Surviving economic challenges, 1966–89
Political dissent and active challenge, 1949–89
The constitutional and legal response to political extremism, 1949–
89
Changing living standards, 1945–89
The role and status of women in the FRG
The status of, and attitudes towards, ethnic minorities in the FRG
Exam focus

Glossary
Key figures
Timeline
Mark schemes
Answers
Introduction
About Paper 1
Paper 1 Option: Germany and West Germany, 1918–89 requires a
breadth of knowledge of a historical period, as well as a knowledge
of the historical debate around the causes of the Second World War.
Paper 1 tests you against two Assessment Objectives: AO1 and
AO3.
AO1 tests your ability to:
• organise and communicate your own knowledge
• analyse and evaluate key features of the past
• make supported judgements
• deal with concepts of cause, consequence, change, continuity,
similarity, difference and significance.
On Paper 1, AO1 tasks require you to write essays from your own
knowledge.
AO3 tests your ability to:
• analyse and evaluate interpretations of the past
• explore interpretations of the past in the context of historical
debate.
On Paper 1, the AO3 task requires you to write an essay which
analyses the work of historians.
At A-level, Paper 1 is worth 30 per cent of your qualification.
At AS-level Paper 1 is worth 60 per cent of your qualification.
Significantly, your AS grade does not count towards your overall A-
level grade.
The exam
The Paper 1 AS exam and A-level exam each last for 2 hours and 15
minutes, and are divided into three sections.
Section A and Section B test the breadth of your historical
knowledge of the four themes.
• Section A requires you to write one essay from a choice of two.
Section A questions will usually test your knowledge of at least a
decade. You should spend around 35 to 40 minutes on Section A –
this includes making a brief plan.
• Section B requires you to write one essay from a choice of two.
Section B essays usually tests your knowledge of a third of the
period 1918–79, around 23 years. You should spend around 35 to
40 minutes on Section B – this includes making a brief plan.
Section C tests your knowledge of the debate around Hitler’s foreign
policy and the causes of the Second World War.
• Section C requires you to answer one compulsory question
relating to two extracts from the work of historians. Questions will
focus on the years 1979–97. You should spend around 35 to 40
minutes on Section C, and an additional 20 minutes to read the
extracts and make a plan.
The AS questions are of a lower level in order to differentiate them
from the A-level questions. You will find examples of AS and A-level
questions throughout the book.
How to use this book
This book has been designed to help you to develop the knowledge
and skills necessary to succeed in this exam.
• Each section is made up of a series of topics organised into
double-page spreads.
• On the left-hand page, you will find a summary of the key content
you need to learn.
• Words in bold in the main content are defined in the glossary.
• On the right-hand page, you will find exam-focused activities.
Together, these two strands of the book will take you through the
knowledge and skills essential for examination success.
Examination activities
There are three levels of exam focused activities.
• Band 1 activities are designed to develop the foundational skills
needed to pass the exam. These have a green heading and this
symbol.
• Band 2 activities are designed to build on the skills developed in
Band 1 activities and to help you achieve a C grade. These have
an orange heading and this symbol.
• Band 3 activities are designed to enable you to access the highest
grades. These have a purple heading and this symbol.
Each section ends with an exam-style question and model high level
answer with commentary. This should give you guidance on what is
required to achieve the top grades.
1 The Weimar Republic, 1918–33
The creation of a republic, 1918–19

The collapse of the Second Reich
The monarchical political system of the German Second Reich began
to change and then collapse in the final weeks of the First World War
and the process of creating a republican system of government
began. Germany shifted towards democracy and to some extent saw
a social revolution with a weakening of aristocratic power. The
German revolution was not a total revolution, however, and many
elements of the old regime remained.
Key Date Description A A social
event democratic revolution?
revolution
The 29 The generals advised the Authoritarian The government was
revolution September Kaiser to appoint a new military rule no longer solely
from to 3 civilian government and seek was at an aristocrats and
above October an armistice. On 3 October end. Junkers but now
1918 the government was created, contained workers
Reichstag
led by Prince Max of Baden. too.
deputies from
liberal and
socialist
parties
formed part
of the new
government.
The 31 A mutiny by sailors in Kiel Many The sailors’ and
revolution October to rapidly spread to other ordinary workers’ soviets
from below 8 German ports. The Germans represented a new
November government began to lose were involved and radical form of
1918 control as soviets sprung up in the political organisation.
across the country, and there disturbances.
were riots in many major
cities.
The 9 Paul von Hindenburg The The government was
abdication November advised the Kaiser to monarchy formed of
of the 1918 abdicate, and William II fled had come to representatives of the
Kaiser and to Holland. Friedrich Ebert, an end, and working class rather
the leader of the SPD, became the than aristocrats.
declaration Chancellor of a government government
of a of SPD and USPD members. was led by
republic the largest
party in the
Reichstag.
Armistice 11 The new government signed
November an armistice agreement with
1918 the Allies.
The 10 Ebert was anti-communist Elections The social impact of
revolution November and determined to prevent were held in the revolution was
limited 1918 to the German revolution January 1919 now limited: the
January becoming a civil war. He thus on the basis Junker class
1919 did a deal with the army to of universal remained dominant in
gain their support (the Ebert– suffrage. the judiciary and the
Groener pact) and called for civil service and the
The elections
early democratic elections. army remained
produced a
unreformed.
constituent
assembly.
Spot the mistake
Below are a sample exam question and a paragraph written in
answer to this question. Why does this paragraph not get into Level
4? Once you have identified the mistake, rewrite the paragraph so
that it displays the qualities of Level 4. The mark scheme on page
114 will help you.
How accurate is it to say that Germany was politically unstable
in the period 1918–33?
Germany was politically unstable at the end of the First World War
because one of the effects of the First World War on Germany was
that there was a revolution. In Germany in October and November
1918 the generals stopped running the country. A new civilian
government was formed. This was the revolution from above. There
was also a rebellion among the navy starting in Kiel and mass
desertions from the army. There were protests and strikes across
the country and some soviets were established. The Kaiser also
abdicated. This was the revolution from below.
Delete as applicable
Below are a sample exam question and a paragraph written in partial
answer to this question. Read the paragraph and decide which of the
possible options (in bold) is the most appropriate. Delete the least
appropriate options and complete the paragraph by justifying your
selection.
How accurate is it to say that defeat in the First World War was
the main cause of political instability in Germany in the years
1918–33?
The loss of the First World War was the main cause of political
instability in Germany 1918 to a great/fair/limited extent. The
impending loss caused political instability in 1918. Generals
Ludendorff and Hindenburg realised at the end of September 1918
that Germany could not win the war and they relinquished power as
they did not want to still be in charge when defeat came. The
generals’ actions triggered the political events that caused massive
political instability and revolution in Germany. Impending defeat in
the war was also one reason why sailors mutinied at Kiel, an act
that kicked off the ‘revolution from below’ that saw the Kaiser
abdicate and the Second Reich collapse. After the war had actually
ended on 11 November 1918, the political instability continued as
an unstable new government was blamed for the harsh terms of the
armistice. It faced political threats from the right-wing extremists
who accused it of having betrayed Germany. In 1918, therefore,
defeat in the First World War was a significant/moderate/limited
cause of political instability in Germany.
___________________________
___________________________
___________________________
The Weimar Constitution
A new system
Following elections in January 1919, a National Assembly met in the
city of Weimar to form an interim parliament and to agree a new
constitution. The largest party in the Assembly was the SPD, which
had won 38 per cent of the vote. SPD representatives wished to
create a democracy which secured rights for workers but they had to
co-operate with the other pro-democracy parties such as the Zentrum
Party (Catholic Centre Party) and the DDP (German Democratic
Party). A liberal democratic system with protections for workers was
eventually agreed upon.
The Weimar Republic

This is the name often given to Germany between 1919 and 1933. It
refers to a period of democracy in Germany and takes its name from
the city where the new constitution was agreed upon. The Weimar
Republic had two presidents: Friedrich Ebert (1919–25) and Paul von
Hindenburg (1925–34).
The constitution
Some of the main features of Weimar’s constitutional arrangements
were as follows.
• A President was to be elected every seven years by universal
suffrage, with the power to select and dismiss the Chancellor. The
Chancellor formed the government.
• The President was Supreme Commander of the Armed Forces.
• The President had emergency powers under Article 48 (see page
10). The President could dissolve the lower house of the German
parliament, the Reichstag, and call new Reichstag elections under
Article 25 of the constitution. The new elections had to occur within
60 days of the dissolution.
• The Chancellor and government were accountable to the Reichstag
and had to resign if they lost the confidence of the Reichstag.
• The Reichstag was to be elected every four years. There was
universal suffrage for people over the age of 20.
• Elections were to be conducted using proportional
representation: the minimum requirement for a seat in the
Reichstag was just 60,000 votes across the entire country.
• The system was a federal one: Germany was divided into 18
regions or states, each of which had their own parliament and local
powers. The state parliaments sent representatives to the
Reichsrat, the upper house of the German parliament. The
Reichsrat could propose amendments or delay legislation passed
by the Reichstag.
• Referenda on single issues could be held if enough people
petitioned for one.
The Bill of Rights

The Weimar Republic’s constitution also included a Bill of Rights in
which certain rights were guaranteed. These provisions included:
• freedoms of speech, association and religion
• the right to work – the government should ensure that everyone had
a job or, failing that, provide financial assistance
• a provision which gave workers special protection in the new state
• welfare rights, e.g. protection for the disabled
• the right to property – this right was guaranteed and businesses
could not be nationalised without compensation.
Mind map
Use the information on the opposite page to add detail to the mind
map below.
Recommended reading
Below is a list of suggested further reading on the topic of the
establishment of the Weimar Republic.
• Chris Harman, The Lost Revolution – Germany 1918 to 1923
(2008), pages 41–50
• Scott Stephenson, The Final Battle: Soldiers of the Western Front
and the German Revolution of 1918 (2009), pages 109–51
• Eberhard Kolb, translated by P. S. Falla and R. J. Park, The
Weimar Republic (2005) pages 3–22
The features of the Weimar Republic’s
constitution
The features of the Weimar Republic’s constitution have been
controversial. Did the system collapse after only 14 years because the
constitution was flawed, or was the constitution a good one which was
misused by politicians? It was a remarkably democratic system, but
one which also tended to produce weak governments.
Democratic features
One notable feature of Weimar Germany’s constitution was its very
democratic character.
• There was an elected President rather than a hereditary monarch.
• There was universal suffrage as women and young men were
enfranchised for the first time.
• The government was now accountable to the elected Reichstag,
unlike in the Second Reich.
• Proportional representation produced very democratic results as the
number of seats allocated in the Reichstag reflected almost exactly
the preferences of voters.
• An element of direct democracy was included in a constitutional
provision which allowed for referenda.
Furthermore, although the President appointed the Chancellor, the
government needed to have Reichstag support, and it became the
norm for members of the Reichstag to be selected as Chancellor. This
gave the government a more democratic character and represented a
change from the Second Reich, where unelected Junkers had
generally been appointed.
The constitution also contained checks and balances which
enhanced its democratic credentials. No one part of the political
system should have been able to become too powerful: the electorate
held the Reichstag to account, while the President could dismiss the
Reichstag but needed the Reichstag’s support to get the
government’s agenda into law. The Bill of Rights also contained liberal
features that helped to support democracy, such as freedom of
speech, which ensured a free press, and freedom of association,
which meant that people were free to participate in politics via political
parties, trade unions or pressure groups.
Emergency provisions
Under Article 48 of the constitution, the President had the power to
rule via presidential decree in the event of an emergency. However,
this power was checked, as the Reichstag could review and overturn
any decree issued under Article 48.
Criticisms of the Weimar Republic’s
constitution
The Weimar Republic’s constitution has been criticised for giving too
much power to the President under Article 25 (which allowed him to
dissolve the Reichstag) and Article 48, although both of these
provisions contained limitations on the President’s power. Proportional
representation has been condemned by some for creating a
fragmented party system which made it difficult to form durable
coalition governments. It also meant that small extremist parties could
gain representation and exposure: there were 20 separate coalition
governments in Weimar Germany. Furthermore, some people in
Germany objected to the socialist elements of the constitution, such
as the right to work and the provision giving workers special
protection.
Supporters and opponents of the Weimar
Republic’s constitution
Supporters The pro-Weimar parties were the SPD, Zentrum Party
and DDP; these parties won a majority in the 1919
elections.
After 1920, the DVP (German People’s Party) started to
support Weimar.
Opponents The conservative DVP initially opposed Weimar as they
wished for a constitutional monarchy.
The right-wing DNVP (German National People’s Party)
wavered in their support for Weimar and were mainly
opposed prior to 1925 and after 1929.
Many industrialists and business owners in Germany felt
that the constitution gave too many rights to workers. By
the early 1930s many of these people had stopped
supporting the Weimar system as they felt it did not serve
their interests.
Complete the paragraph

answer to this question. The paragraph contains a point and specific
examples, but lacks a concluding analytical link back to the question.
Complete the paragraph, adding this link in the space provided.
How far do you agree that the Weimar constitution undermined
stability in Germany 1919–29?
I agree to a limited extent that the Weimar constitution undermined

stability in Germany in these years. With a proportional
representation (PR) electoral system, the Weimar constitution
meant that it was very difficult to form stable governments, as no
party received enough votes to form a government on its own and
unstable coalition governments were formed. These governments
were short-lived. In addition, the PR system gave small political
parties political representation in the Reichstag.
___________________________
___________________________
Eliminate irrelevance
answer to this question. Read the paragraph and identify parts of the
paragraph that are not directly relevant to the question. Draw a line
through the information that is irrelevant and justify your deletions in
the margin.
How accurate is it to say that the Weimar constitution
undermined stability in Germany in 1919–29?
It is not really accurate to say that the Weimar Republic’s

constitution undermined stability in Germany in 1919–29. Most of
the problems that Weimar faced were nothing to do with the
constitution. Although the constitution did add to political instability,
as the PR system made it difficult to form durable governments, the
main problems that Weimar faced were political extremism and
economic problems that had nothing to do with the constitution. The
political extremists included the Spartacists, named after a Thracian
gladiator, and the Nazi Party, led by Hitler. Hitler was born in
Braunau am Inn in Austria, and later lived in Vienna. His failed
career as an artist had made him bitter. The existence of the
extremists was more a result of defeat in the war and not really to
do with the Weimar constitution. Use of PR for the electoral system
made it easier for extremists to gain representation in the
Reichstag, but PR is a very democratic election system that did not
cause the existence of extremists. So use of PR did not mean that
the Weimar Republic’s constitution was flawed from the outset.
Opposition to the government: The legacy
of war and defeat
Weimar Germany had been born of revolution, defeat and social and
economic turmoil – and in its early years the Republic struggled to
overcome various political and economic challenges.
The legacy of the First World War
Defeat in the First World War created a number of problems for the
new democracy. Democratic politicians had no real option but to sign
the armistice that ended the First World War in November 1918. The
fact that they did so meant that many Germans unfairly blamed the
democratic politicians for the defeat: some on the right labelled them
the ‘November Criminals’. The ‘stab in the back myth’, or Dolchstoss,
which falsely portrayed the cause of the German loss to have been
the revolution and betrayal by democratic and socialist politicians, was
widely believed in some sections of German society and served to
undermine support for Weimar Germany. When the Treaty of
Versailles was signed, disillusionment with the new Republic set in
because, despite the formation of the new democracy, a punitive
peace treaty had been imposed. An additional negative legacy of the
war was that its cost produced inflation, which contributed to post-war
economic problems (see page 14).
The Treaty of Versailles

The Treaty of Versailles was the peace treaty between Germany and
its opponents in the First World War.
• Germany’s armed forces were restricted to 100,000 men in the
army.
• Only six battleships were permitted, while no submarines or air
force were allowed.
• Germany lost territory, including its overseas colonies and territory
in Europe, such as West Posen and West Prussia to newly created
Poland, and Alsace and Lorraine to France.
• The Rhineland, which bordered France, was demilitarised and the
Saarland placed under League of Nations control.
• Union with Austria, Anschluss, was banned.
• Germany had to accept liability for the war in Clause 231, the ‘War
Guilt’ clause, and pay compensation or reparations to the victors
for damages incurred during the war.
The treaty was widely reviled in Germany as a diktat, or dictated
peace.
Develop the detail

answer to this question. The paragraph contains a limited amount of
detail. Annotate the paragraph to add additional detail to the answer.
How accurate is it to say that opposition to the German state
became progressively weaker in the period 1918–45?
Opposition to the German state was strong at the start of the period.
In the early years of Weimar, there was a lot of opposition to the
state because the German public was shocked about losing the
First World War and blamed the new government. In addition to
this, many Germans were opposed to the state because they
associated it with the hated Treaty of Versailles. For these reasons,
opposition to the German state was strong at the start of the period.
Developing an argument
Below are a sample exam question, a list of key points that could be
made to partially answer the question and a paragraph from the
essay. Read the question, the partial plan and the sample paragraph.
Rewrite the paragraph in order to develop an argument. Your
paragraph should answer the question directly and set out the
evidence that supports your argument. Crucially, it should develop an
argument by setting out a general answer to the question and the
reasons that support this.
How far do you agree that the most important factor driving
opposition to the Weimar Republic 1919–32 was defeat in the
First World War?
Key points
• The shock of defeat and ideas of the ‘stab in the back’ and
‘November criminals’
• The Republic was born of defeat
• The Republic was born of revolution – political opposition
• The peace created opposition – the Treaty of Versailles
Sample paragraph
Germany lost the First World War. This created opposition to the
new democratic Weimar Republic as it was created in this time of
defeat. People were shocked that Germany had lost, because the
army had seemed to be in a strong position in the early summer of
1918. The shock meant that the public struggled to accept the
defeat. Even though it was the old and not the new regime that had
lost the war, the idea grew in right-wing circles that Germany had
been ‘stabbed in the back’ – betrayed by democrats, communists,
socialists and Jews who wanted to overthrow the government and
the Kaiser. Pro-Weimar democratic politicians were thus blamed by
some for losing the war. People associated the Republic with defeat
and also the idea that politicians had sold Germany out by signing
the armistice in November 1918.
Economic crises, 1918–23
In 1923, many of the political and economic problems of Weimar
Germany reached crisis point as inflation spiralled out of control, the
German industrial region of the Ruhr was invaded and the Nazis
attempted to overthrow the government.
The inflationary problem
Wartime and demobilisation inflation
• The First World War left Germany with high inflation. Much of the
cost of the war had been financed by increasing the money supply
and the German currency consequently declined in value.
• Wartime shortages exacerbated the problem and caused price
rises.
• In the aftermath of the war, government expenditure remained high
as the government had to support war widows, injured war veterans
and millions of demobilised soldiers.
• Furthermore, the new constitution made social security a
constitutional right, which obligated the government to provide
support to the unemployed.
Reparations
• From 1921, the problem increased when reparations payments
commenced.
• One difficulty Germany faced in meeting its reparations obligations
was that most of the reparations had to be paid for in gold or foreign
currency.
• As inflation increased and the value of the German currency
weakened, buying gold or foreign currency to pay for reparations
became an ever more expensive burden.
• In 1922, the German government sought to suspend their
reparations payments, but were refused permission by the Allies.
• By early 1923, Germany was failing to meet all of its reparations
obligations.
The Ruhr Crisis, 1923
In January 1923 the French and Belgian governments responded to
German failure to meet all reparations payments by ordering the
invasion of the Ruhr. Their armies occupied factories and mines and
seized raw materials and goods in place of reparations. With
government support, workers and business owners in the Ruhr
followed a policy of passive resistance, refusing to co-operate with the
occupying forces by going on strike. The German government paid
the workers and compensated owners for lost revenue, thus adding to
government expenditure. The situation in the Ruhr further damaged
the German economy.
Hyperinflation
Inflation, which was already a profound problem following the war, ran
out of control due to the Ruhr crisis as confidence in the German
currency collapsed. Consequently, the mark became worthless. To try
to meet spending obligations, the government printed more and more
money, which added to the problem. In 1923, 300 paper mills and 150
printing presses worked 24 hours a day to print money. As the new
government of Gustav Stresemann struggled to resolve the situation,
the Nazis launched a failed Putsch in Munich in November 1923 (see
page 20). In the end, the issue of hyperinflation was resolved (see
page 16) – but not without causing a great shock to Germans, many
of whom saw their savings eradicated or standard of living
dramatically reduced. Debtors (who included many large business
owners) benefitted, however, as the value of their debts was wiped out
by hyperinflation.
Inflation in Germany 1919–23: marks needed to buy one US dollar
Apr Nov Aug Jan Sep 1923 Dec 1923
1919 1921 1922 1923
12 263 1,000 17,000 98,860,000 4,200,000,000,000
Establish criteria
Below is a sample exam question which requires you to make a
judgement. The key term in the question has been underlined.
Defining the meaning of the key term can help you to establish
criteria that you can use to make a judgement.
Read the question, define the key term and then set out two or three
criteria based on the key term which you can use to reach and justify
a judgement.
How accurate is it to say that the main problem facing the
Weimar Republic between 1919 and 1923 was inflation?
Definition:
___________________________
___________________________
Criteria:
___________________________
___________________________
___________________________
Support your judgement

Below are a sample exam question and two basic judgements. Read
the exam question and the two judgements. Support the judgement
that you agree with most strongly by adding a reason that justifies
the judgement.
How accurate is it to say that the most significant problem facing
the Weimar Republic in the years 1919–33 was inflation?
It is generally accurate to say that the most significant problem

facing the Weimar Republic between 1919 and 1933 was inflation
___________________________
___________________________
While inflation was a difficulty, it was not the most significant

problem facing the Weimar Republic between 1919 and 1933
___________________________
___________________________
Tip: whichever option you choose you will have to weigh up both
sides of the argument. You could use phrases such as ‘whereas’ or
words like ‘although’ in order to help the process of evaluation.
Government responses to economic crisis
The actions of Gustav Stresemann
As Chancellor, Stresemann helped to solve the crisis of 1923 by
calling off passive resistance to French occupation in the Ruhr. This
reduced the government’s reparations payments and calmed the
situation. Stresemann recognised that international confidence in
Germany would only be restored if Germany met its obligations and
so he restarted reparations payments. To pay for this, government
spending was cut (700,000 state employees were sacked) and
Stresemann worked to negotiate the Dawes Plan, which alleviated the
burden of reparations payments and provided US loans and
investment to assist the German economy.
In addition, Stresemann worked with banker Hjalmar Schacht and
finance minister Hans Luther to resolve inflation. The old currency was
abolished and a new currency, the Rentenmark, was established. One
unit of the new currency was worth one trillion of the old. The new
currency was guaranteed by linking it to German industrial and
agricultural assets.
The Dawes Plan, 1924

Banker Charles Dawes led an international committee which
redesigned reparations. The annual payment of gold marks was
reduced to 1 million, rising to 2.5 million from 1929. An international
loan was made available to help Germany pay.
Living standards during the early years of Weimar

Germany
The hyperinflation crisis affected those with savings adversely, as
their values were all but eradicated. The German middle classes
often had substantial savings, and the decimation of these
dramatically reduced their security and, in many cases, living
standards. Those with debts, such as some businesses and many
farmers, found their values substantially reduced, however, and in
this sense their material position improved. High rates of inflation
helped to ensure high levels of employment, which helped to
maintain workers’ living standards, as did new laws that protected
their position. During the period of hyperinflation, wages did not keep
up with prices, and so workers’ standard of living did suffer in this
sense. Generally, however, the position of workers improved in the
early years of Weimar, and wages rose.

the judgement.
How far do you agree that German government introduced
effective economic policies in the years 1919–29?
To some extent the German government introduced effective

economic policies in the years 1919–29
___________________________
___________________________
To a significant extent the German government introduced effective

___________________________
___________________________
To a limited extent the German government introduced effective

___________________________
___________________________
Develop the detail

How far do you agree that the actions of Gustav Stresemann
were primarily responsible for creating stability in Germany by
1929?
As Chancellor and Foreign Secretary in the Weimar Republic,

Gustav Stresemann took a number of actions which helped to
create stability in Germany by 1928. Stresemann acted decisively in
1923 in ending the Ruhr crisis. This reduced government costs. He
also took steps that helped to create economic stability by
introducing a new currency, the Rentenmark, which helped to end
hyperinflation and started a period of economic growth in Germany.
In addition, Stresemann helped to create economic stability by
negotiating the Dawes Plan.
Opposition to the government: political
extremism, 1918–23 (part 1)
Political extremists from the right and left were opposed to democracy
in Germany and constituted a major threat to it.
The threat from the extreme left
Some on the extreme left wished to see Germany become a
communist state akin to the Soviet Union and sought the destruction
of Weimar Germany.
The Spartacist Uprising, 1919

In January 1919, the communist political group the Spartacists took
advantage of a large political protest in Berlin to launch an attempted
communist revolution. President Ebert ordered the paramilitary
Freikorps, volunteer groups of armed ex-servicemen, to crush the
attempted rebellion. The leaders of the Spartacists, Rosa Luxembourg
and Karl Liebknecht, were killed.
Strikes, risings and communist takeover

Widespread strike action and communist street violence contributed to
the atmosphere of instability in Germany in the early 1920s.
Communists also temporarily took control or rebelled in a number of
areas of Germany: Bavaria in 1919, the Ruhr in 1920 and Saxony and
Thuringia in 1923. With Ebert’s support, the army and sometimes
Freikorps acted to crush these rebellions.
Fear of communism
The activities of left-wing revolutionaries and the success of the
communist takeover in Russia caused many to fear communist
revolution in Germany. This fear of communism led some to overlook
the threat posed by the extreme right – who, in reality, were the larger
danger.
The threat from the extreme right
Many on the extreme right did not support democracy and tried to
undermine or destroy the Weimar system.
The Kapp Putsch, 1920

Following an order to disband a Freikorps group as part of the
disarmament process that occurred in Germany after the First World
War, a group of right-wing politicians and soldiers seized control of
government in Berlin for several days. The government fled to
Stuttgart. The Putsch lacked support both from the general public and
many in the elite, and collapsed. The Putsch is named after one of its
leaders, Wolfgang Kapp.
White terror: assassinations and violence

Anti-Weimar paramilitary groups carried out a wave of political
assassinations between 1919 and 1922 and created a destabilising
atmosphere of violence on the streets of Germany as they launched
violent attacks on political opponents. In total, 354 political
assassinations were carried out by right-wing death squads, primarily
the group Organisation Consul, including the murder of prominent
politicians such as former finance minister and Zentrum Party member
Matthias Erzberger in 1921, and foreign minister and industrialist
Walther Rathenau in 1922.
Political assassinations
• Between January 1919 and 24 June 1922 there were a total of 376
political murders in Germany.
• 354 of these were committed by sympathisers of the right, with
whom many judges sympathised. Of these murders, 326 went
unpunished, and one life sentence and a total of 90 years in prison
were handed out.
• 22 of these murders were committed by sympathisers of the left.
Of these murders, four went unpunished, and 10 death sentences,
three life sentences and a total of 250 years in prison were handed
out.
Damaging ideas
The nationalist right did not just undermine Weimar through direct
action: ideas such as the ‘stab in the back’ myth had a negative effect
by making democracy appear weak and un-German and by portraying
democratic politicians as traitors.
Lack of public support for democracy

Another problem faced by Weimar was that the new democratic
system did not have wholehearted support of the majority of
Germans between 1919 and 1923. The first election in 1919
produced a majority for the pro-Weimar parties, but the 1920 election
saw their support slump to only 45 per cent.
possible options (in bold) is most appropriate. Delete the least
selection.
How far do you agree that the extreme right posed more of a
threat to government in Germany than the extreme left in the
years 1919–23?
In the early Weimar era, I agree to a limited/fair/great extent that

the extreme right posed more of a threat to government in Germany
than the extreme left. The extreme left was often perceived as more
of a threat, and there were attempts to provoke revolution such as
during the Spartacist Uprising in 1919. There was also a temporary
communist takeover of power in Munich in 1919. Both the
Spartacist Uprising and the Soviet Republic in Bavaria were
defeated by the Freikorps. The extreme right also launched
attempted seizures of power, such as during the Kapp Putsch in
1920 and the Munich Putsch in 1923. The Kapp Putsch was
particularly serious, as those behind it succeeded in taking control
of the central government for a number of days. The extreme right
posed more a threat to democracy than the extreme left in the early
years of Weimar because of the far higher level of political
assassinations that they committed. In total, 354 political murders
were carried out by the extreme right, including the murders of
senior democratic politicians such as Erzberger and Rathenau. The
extreme left carried out 22 political murders in the same period,
which also undermined democracy, but not to the same extent.
Furthermore, the extreme right promoted ideas, such as the ‘stab in
the back myth’, that were a threat to democracy. The ‘myth’ involved
the idea that Germany only lost the war because of the traitorous
activities of democrats, socialists and Jews. Overall, in the early
years of the Weimar Republic, I agree that the extreme right posed
a greater threat to the democratic government than the extreme left
to a limited/moderate/significant extent.
___________________________
___________________________
Establish criteria
Defining the meaning of the key term can help you establish criteria
that you can use to make a judgement.
criteria based on a key term, which you can use to reach and justify a
judgement.
How accurate is it to say that political extremism posed a
significant threat to the stability of the Weimar Republic 1919–
29?
Definition:
___________________________
___________________________
Criteria:
___________________________
___________________________
___________________________
Opposition to the government: political
extremism, 1918–23 (part 2)
The party that would later take over power and end the Weimar
Republic, the National Socialist or Nazi Party, was founded in the
context of the climate of political extremism that existed in Germany
after the end of the First World War.
The origins of the Nazi party
The German Workers’ Party (DAP) was founded by Anton Drexler in
politically unstable Munich in the aftermath of the First World War.
Despite the party’s socialist-sounding name, Drexler’s real agenda
was nationalist, but he hoped to attract German workers away from
support for socialism and communism and towards support for a
nationalist agenda by addressing some of their material concerns.
Austrian-born Adolf Hitler was sent by the German army to report
upon the DAP’s activities. At this time the party was tiny and had very
little impact but, interested in what he heard, Hitler joined the party
and soon made an impact through his powerful oratory in speeches
that condemned the Treaty of Versailles and blamed communists and
Jews for Germany’s problems. To emphasise its nationalist agenda,
the party was now renamed the National Socialist German Workers’
Party (or NSDAP, commonly referred to as the Nazis). In 1920,
Drexler and Hitler drew up the party programme, the 25 Points, and in
1921 Hitler became leader, or Führer, of the Party.
Nazi ideology
The 25 Points contained the key elements of the Nazi party message.
Hitler developed this ideology in speeches and his books Mein Kampf
(1925) and Zweites Buch (1928).
• German nationalism: Germany should be strong, and all German-
speaking peoples should be united in order to help maximise
German strength. To develop German power, colonial expansion
into Eastern Europe was needed. This ‘living space’ was called
Lebensraum. In order for Germany to be strong, the Treaty of
Versailles should be repudiated.
• Racial ideas: at the core of Hitler’s ideas were false notions about
race. These ideas had their origins in pseudo-scientific notions of
the day. Hitler believed that differences between racial groups were
profound and significant. Furthermore, he thought that races were
organised into a hierarchy with Aryans, a Germanic-Nordic race, at
the top. As a German nationalist, Hitler wanted Germany to
maximise its strength, something he thought was only possible if a
racially pure Aryan society was created in Germany. In his view,
racial purity equalled national strength.
• Anti-Semitism: Hitler believed Jews to be a race and developed
the notion that Aryan strength would be compromised and polluted
through interbreeding with Jews, who he regarded as a vastly
inferior racial group. Hitler also believed that Jews were engaged in
a plot to sap Aryan racial strength through interbreeding.
• Social Darwinism: Hitler also subscribed to social Darwinist ideas.
The notion of the ‘survival of the fittest’ was used as a moral
principle by Hitler, who believed that not only did the fittest or
strongest of species survive, but that it was morally right that the
strongest triumph. Thus ‘weaker’ races and people should be
eradicated.
Fascism
The philosophy of Hitler and the Nazis was fascist. Fascism
combines an often racist nationalism with militarism and a belief in a
strong state and strong authoritarian leadership. Fascism is anti-
democratic and anti-socialist and also includes the idea of the need
for some sort of national rebirth. One difference between Nazism and
some kinds of fascism, such as Italian fascism, was the Nazis’
obsession with anti-Semitism.
The Munich Putsch, November 1923
In the early 1920s, Hitler cultivated links with the elite in Munich and
started to build up support for the party. He also worked with Ernst
Röhm to develop an armed wing, the Sturm Abteilung, SA. In the
atmosphere of crisis in Germany in late 1923 (see page 14), Hitler felt
sufficiently confident to launch an attempted takeover of government.
On 8 November in a beer hall in Munich, Hitler and Röhm, with the
backing of ex-military leader General von Ludendorff, took control of a
conservative political meeting and Hitler announced a national
revolution. Hitler hoped to unite right-wing nationalists in an armed
march to seize control of the country and provoke the army to rebel. In
the event, some of the conservative politicians upon whose support
Hitler had counted reported the plot to the authorities and the
Bavarian police were able to stop the Putsch as its participants
marched through Munich on 9 November. Hitler was arrested two
days later and charged with high treason. He eventually received a
five-year sentence, but served only nine months in jail.
Mind map
map below.
Recommended reading
Below is a list of suggested further reading on this topic.
• Richard J. Evans, The Coming of the Third Reich (2004), pages
156–75
• Ian Kershaw, Hitler 1889–1936: Hubris (1998), pages 129–66
Controlling extremism, 1918–23
Despite political violence, attempted revolution, financial crisis and
invasion, Weimar did survive its early period and emerged stronger
and more successful in the latter part of the 1920s. Extremists did not
succeed in destroying democracy at this point. The weakness of some
of Weimar’s opponents and the actions of some of its politicians
helped Weimar to survive.
The weakness of Weimar’s opponents
Weimar’s opponents were disunited and fragmented and often had
conflicting political goals. Additionally, they lacked effective
organisation and widespread support.
Poor leadership and planning

The Spartacists did not carefully plan their attempted takeover of
power, as Lenin had in Russia, but opportunistically tried to turn a
protest into a revolution. During the Munich Putsch (see page 20),
Hitler exhibited indecision as he dithered overnight about whether to
launch his Putsch, which gave time to others to alert the authorities. In
addition, the route marched during the Putsch, down a fairly narrow
street, allowed the Bavarian police to trap the rebels and defeat them.
Lack of support from the public

Despite the lack of enthusiasm that many Germans had for the
Republic, there was not widespread support for extremist attempts at
revolution or violence. The Spartacists had only around 15,000
members (far fewer than the SPD) and a huge general strike brought
down the government established by Kapp. 700,000 people
demonstrated in Berlin against political violence following the murder
of Walther Rathenau in 1922 and it was this public revulsion, rather
than police or judicial action, that brought an end to the
assassinations.
The strengths of democracy
Democracy also had a series of strengths that helped it survive its
difficult early years.
The actions of Ebert

President Ebert acted decisively and ruthlessly against the Spartacists
in 1919 and other left-wing rebels such as those in the Ruhr in 1920.
He also led the call for a general strike in Berlin during the Kapp
Putsch. During the Munich Putsch, Ebert ruled under Article 48 briefly,
which enabled him to take control of the situation.
Support of some of the elite

Despite the ambivalence of many in the elite for the new political
system, at crucial points, certain members of the elite helped it to
survive. The army enthusiastically crushed left-wing rebellions and the
head of the army, General von Seeckt, did not endorse the Kapp
Putsch, although neither did he oppose it. The army supported the
government during the Munich Putsch. The civil service and banking
community refused to cooperate with the Kapp government.
Support from the international community

The Dawes Plan of 1924 helped to stabilise the German economy and
currency (see page 16). The international support that the plan
received from politicians and bankers helped to restore confidence in
the German economy for a time.
Support or challenge?
Below is a sample exam question which asks how far you agree with
a specific statement. Below that is a series of general statements
which are relevant to the question. Using your own knowledge and
the information on the opposite page, decide whether these
statements support or challenge the statement in the question and
tick the appropriate box.
How accurate is it to say that it was the weaknesses of Weimar’s
opponents that allowed the Republic to survive until 1930?
Support Challenge
There were a number of attempts to
overthrow the Weimar Republic, including
the Munich Putsch, the Kapp Putsch and the
Spartacist Uprising
The international community supported
Weimar’s survival via the Dawes Plan and
the Young Plan
The actions of Ebert and Stresemann
helped the Republic to survive
The opponents of Weimar lacked public
support before 1930
There were a number of communist
uprisings in the Weimar Republic
The attempts to overthrow the Republic
were badly organised
Weimar’s economy performed well between
1924 and 1929 and inflation was not a
problem at this time

How accurate is it to say that it was the weaknesses of Weimar’s
opponents that allowed the Republic to survive until 1930?
The weaknesses of Weimar’s opponents in some ways contributed
to the survival of the Weimar Republic until 1932. Weimar faced
determined opposition from the extreme right and the extreme left.
However, one weakness that the extremists faced was that before
1930 they lacked public support. This was shown by the general
strike that occurred in opposition to the Kapp Putsch in 1920 and in
the lack of public support for the Nazis during the Munich Putsch in
1923. In 1919, the communist group the Spartacists had tried to
launch an uprising in Berlin but had not succeeded in gaining mass
support. The moderate and pro-Weimar socialist SPD had far more
support than the Spartacists. In addition, the murders carried out by
extremists were generally opposed by the public, as a massive
demonstration after the murder of Walther Rathenau in 1922
showed. Furthermore, Weimar’s opponents were weak in the early
years of the Republic because they were often badly organised and
led. The Munich Putsch, for example, was not effectively planned
and implemented by Hitler. Overall,
___________________________
___________________________
Policies for recovery, 1924–29 – the
‘Golden Years’
After the difficult early years of the new republic, subsequent years
saw economic improvements and greater political stability. During this
era, sometimes referred to as the ‘Golden Years’, support for
democracy increased, the economy grew and Germany gained
acceptance in the international community. However, underneath the
apparently stable surface, Germany still had a great many problems.
Were the ‘Golden Years’ really so golden?
Positive features Negative features
Politics Increased political Immature party politics and unstable coalitions
stability • Political parties, who were unused to the real
• No Putsch attempts. political power that the new constitution gave
• No political them, did not co-operate well or make the
assassinations. compromises that coalition politics required. The
• The creation of the SPD were often reluctant to co-operate with
Grand Coalition in others, while governments were sometimes
1928: this coalition, brought down by trivial issues, such as the
led by the SPD’s collapse of Luther’s 1926 administration over the
Müller, was a coalition issue of what the German flag should look like.
of the left, right and • Forming stable coalition governments proved
centre and difficult: the centre right and right wing could
commanded a secure agree on domestic policies but not foreign
majority (over 60 per policies, while the centre right and the left could
cent) in the Reichstag. agree on foreign policy but not domestic policies.
There were consequently seven governments in
Increased acceptance
the period 1923–29 and some governments did
of democracy
not have the majority support in the Reichstag.
• By the 1928 election
76 per cent of people Extremist support
supported pro-Weimar • Support for extremists may have reduced but it
parties. remained worryingly high, with one-quarter of
• Support for the Nazis people voting for parties that wished to see
was very low: they Weimar democracy end: the KPD, German
obtained only 2.6 per Communist Party, obtained 10.6 per cent of the
cent of the vote in vote in 1928.
1928. The role of Hindenburg
• A far-right coalition • Hindenburg was obstructive to the idea of working
failed to get support in with the SPD before 1928 and also had, until that
their anti-Young Plan time, insisted that the far right DNVP be included
referendum. in coalitions.
The role of Hindenburg
• Despite his
authoritarian past,
President Hindenburg,
elected in 1925,
supported the new
constitution in the
1920s and in 1928
chose an SPD
Chancellor, Müller.
Economics Economic growth and A sluggish agricultural sector
development • Agriculture was in recession from 1927.
• By 1928, production
Dependence on the United States
equalled that of 1913.
• It appeared to make sense to use US money to
• By 1928, national
promote development and economic growth in
income was 12 per
cent higher than in Germany – but when the effects of the Wall
1913. Street Crash and the Great Depression started to
• Certain sectors of the affect Germany, credit dried up and the US
economy performed sought repayment of loans.
particularly well.
Problematic unemployment
Chemicals company
• Unemployment did not fall below 1.3 million and
IG Farben became the
levels were climbing before the impact of US
largest manufacturer
economic problems was felt.
in Europe.
• Exports rose by 40 per Economic weaknesses
cent between 1925 • The German economy suffered from
and 1929. underinvestment during this period.
• Loans from the • The German economy did not perform as well as
international comparable economies, such as Britain and
community and France.
particularly the US Social tensions
financed the • Tensions remained high between workers and
development of business owners: industrial disputes were
infrastructure in common and many industrialists resented the
Germany: 25.5 billion system of arbitration established to resolve
marks were loaned disputes.
1924–30.
• Inflation remained
relatively low.
• Unemployment ran at
a relatively low rate for
much of the 1920s.
Improved standards of
living
• Wages rose every
year between 1924
and 1930.
Spot the mistake

114 will help you.
How far do you agree that the German economy was in
continual difficulties in the years 1919–32?
I do not agree entirely with this. The economy of the Weimar
Republic performed better in the years 1924–29 and before the Wall
Street Crash it looked quite strong. Between 1924 and 1929 there
was not a serious problem with inflation and while there was
unemployment in Germany at this time, the level was not too high.
The economy grew, and by 1928 its size had exceeded the size of
the pre-war economy. The export sector increased by 40 per cent,
showing that Germany had regained its role as a trading country.
Certain areas of the economy, such as the chemical industry,
performed very well. There was also investment in infrastructure.
Because of the positive economic situation, living standards also
rose in Germany between 1924 and 1929.
How far do you agree that politicians in Germany consistently
pursued effective economic policies in the years 1923–45?
Support Challenge
Stresemann called off the passive
resistance to French occupation in 1923,
which helped restore some international
confidence in Germany’s economy
Stresemann negotiated the Dawes Plan,
which saw money for investment flow into
Germany
The international loans to Germany in the
1920s created a dangerous dependence on
the United States
Unemployment remained persistent
throughout the 1920s
The German economy did not grow as much
as other economies between 1924 and 1929
The German agricultural sector was in
recession from 1927
Social and cultural attitudes and policies
Weimar culture and society in the 1920s
Newly democratic Germany saw a flourishing of cultural
experimentation and a more liberal and tolerant atmosphere. This has
contributed to the creation of a positive perception of Weimar
Germany. Society also reflected these values: gay culture burgeoned
in Berlin, and some young women in cities were able to pursue
careers and live in an independent manner. Many Germans did not
regard these cultural changes positively, however, and came to
associate the Weimar system with decadence and experimentation.
Outside of large urban areas, most Germans still preferred traditional
culture and traditional roles for women and did not tolerate
homosexuality.
The position of women
In the years after the First World War, some young women were able
to live a more independent and self-supporting way of life than had
generally been possible before the war. More women attended
university and worked in profession occupations. In big cities, and
particularly in Berlin, young women dressed and behaved in a more
relaxed way than previously (by, for example, smoking), and were to
an extent more sexually liberated. Working-class women had often
worked before the First Word War, however, so their position was not
much altered. Furthermore, most German women continued to have
traditional roles as wives and mothers within families, and many
German women were hostile to the values of the young and single
city-dwelling ‘new women’.
The position of gay people
In Berlin in the Weimar era, gay culture was tolerated to a large
extent, despite homosexuality being theoretically still illegal. Gay
culture flourished in Berlin after the First World War, and there were
countless gay bars and gay publications in existence in the 1920s and
early 1930s.
Cultural experimentation
Weimar Germany led the world in cultural and artistic developments in
the 1920s.
Weimar artistic culture

• In art, George Grosz and Otto Dix produced artworks that reflected
on the impact of the First World War and satirised the Junker class
and many features of Weimar society.
• In architecture and design, the hugely influential Bauhaus
movement created modern designs for buildings, furniture and
graphics.
• In music, American jazz became very popular and began to
influence the sound of German popular music. There was a lively
jazz scene in Berlin.
• In literature, Erik Maria Remarque’s All Quiet On the Western Front
(1929) examined the traumatic impact of the First World War on
German soldiers.
• In cinema, Germany had a world-leading industry and
expressionist works such as Fritz Lang’s Metropolis (1927) were
particularly influential.
• Satirical forms of cabaret were popular in Berlin.
Education in the Weimar Republic
According to the Weimar constitution, education in Weimar Germany
had a moral purpose to encourage students’ personal development
and sense of civic responsibility, while also fostering a spirit of
reconciliation with the peoples of other countries. It was also the goal
of education policy to provide equal access to education to all
students, regardless of their wealth. Free education was provided for
all until age 14, but the goal of integrating schooling to ensure equal
access (as outlined in the 1920 School Law) was never achieved at
secondary level. At primary level, schools were not allowed to select
according to ability or religious affiliation, but at secondary level some
religious private schools remained. The most prestigious schools,
grammar schools (Gymnasia), often remained fee-paying. A system of
inspections was introduced, however, and moves to increase religious
education were defeated. Some, such as Rudolph Steiner,
experimented with very liberal educational methods.
The status of, and attitudes towards, ethnic
minorities, 1918–32
Practising Jews in Germany formed about 1 per cent of the
population. During the late nineteenth century, explicitly anti-Semitic
and German nationalist political groups sprung up. Pseudo-scientific
racial ideas that Europeans were racially superior to those peoples
they colonised in, for example, Africa were also commonly held. The
legacy of these attitudes was felt in the Weimar era. Jews had equal
citizenship rights in Weimar Germany, but stereotypes and prejudice
continued. Jews were informally excluded from certain professions,
such as the judiciary, and there existed a perception of Jews as rich
and greedy, despite the fact that 20 per cent of Jews in Germany lived
in poverty. Racist attitudes about German ‘superiority’ continued in
relation to the small number of black people, often jazz musicians,
who lived in Germany at this time. The racial attitudes of most
Germans were not that different from the attitudes of many Europeans
at the time, however.
the margin.
How far do you agree that the lives of women in Germany were
transformed in the years 1918–33?
The lives of some women were transformed in the Weimar era in

Germany. Some young women living in urban areas, particularly
Berlin, were able to live an independent and single life in a way that
had not been possible before the First World War. This was all part
of the more liberal and tolerant culture in Germany, and particularly
in Berlin. At this time there was a great deal of cultural
experimentation in Germany, as can be seen in the art work of
Kirchener, the designs of the Bauhaus and in the development of
cabaret as an art form. Furthermore, more women went to
university and trained and worked in professions in this era.
However, most women continued to occupy traditional roles within
the family as wives and mothers, and many working-class women
had worked before the Weimar era anyway, so the lives of these
women were not transformed.
Recommended reading
Below is a list of suggested further reading on the culture of Berlin in
the Weimar era.
• Christopher Isherwood, Goodbye to Berlin (1939)
• Peter Gay, Weimar Culture – the Outsider as Insider (1968), pages
102–18
• Eric D. Weitz, Weimar Germany – Promise and Tragedy (2007),
pages 297–330
The impact of and responses to the Great
Depression, 1929–32
The economic impact of the Depression
Following the Wall Street stock market crash in the United States in
October 1929, the American economy experienced a depression as
bankruptcies and a banking crisis ensued. The German economy was
heavily dependent upon US money and was therefore very exposed
when US investment dried up and loans were recalled.
The German economy was severely affected:
• National income shrunk by 39 per cent between 1929 and 1932.
• Industrial production declined by more than 40 per cent.
• The number of unemployed rose to officially around 6 million by
1932 (the actual figure was probably higher). One-third of people of
working age were affected.
• 50,000 businesses were bankrupted.
• In 1931, as the German economy collapsed, a banking crisis was
triggered and five major banks went bankrupt. Other banks
remained closed for three weeks.
• Homelessness and poverty increased and people’s standard of
living decreased – many felt insecure and desperate.
Responses to the Depression
Before 1931, the responses of the German government to the
Depression served to deepen problems and increase political
disillusionment. The members of Müller’s Grand Coalition government
disagreed over whether the response to the rising level of
unemployment should be to cut welfare spending, and President
Hindenburg refused to back his SPD Chancellor Müller over the issue
– Müller did not support cuts.
Müller’s government fell and was replaced by that of Heinrich Brüning
of the Zentrum Party. Brüning lacked the support of the Reichstag
and came to rely on President Hindenburg pushing through his
measures using the emergency Article 48 provisions of the
constitution. Brüning followed with policies of cuts and austerity in
1930, which deepened the Depression and increased poverty. He
became known as the ‘hunger Chancellor’. The Chancellor was more
focused upon ending reparations payments (which he achieved in
1931 with the Hoover Moratorium) than upon dealing with
unemployment, hunger and the shrinking economy. He did, however,
begin a modest public works scheme after the banking collapse of
1931. This scheme was extended by Chancellor von Papen in 1932
and expanded further by Chancellor von Schleicher during his short-
lived administration. Brüning’s actions on the Depression could be
characterised as ‘too little, too late’, and in failing to come up with
effective solutions, the governments between 1930 and 1932
increased the crisis of democracy that contributed to Hitler’s rise to
power.
The effects of the Depression on living standards

The Depression had a catastrophic effect on living standards for
workers, with around one in three people affected by unemployment.
Reductions in the level of welfare support further increased the
suffering and left many in desperate and even destitute
circumstances. Shanty towns and soup kitchens sprung up. In the
middle classes, some people were also affected by reduced wages
and redundancies, and others lost their savings in the banking crash.
Many business owners went bust.
Mind map
map below.
Identify an argument
Below are a series of definitions, a sample exam question and two
sample conclusions. One of the conclusions achieves a high mark
because it contains an argument (an assertion justified with a
reason). The other achieves a lower mark because it contains only
description (a detailed account) and assertion (a statement of fact or
an opinion which is not supported by a reason). Identify which is
which. The mark scheme on page 114 will help you.
How far do you agree that the economic policies followed by the
Weimar governments 1919–33 were ineffective in dealing with
the economic problems that Germany faced?
In conclusion, the governments of Weimar did not generally have

effective economic policies. In 1923, inflation was ended through
the introduction a new currency, the Rentenmark. Before this,
inflation had run out of control and had reached the level of
hyperinflation. People’s savings were wiped out and the currency
was worthless. The government’s response to the Depression after
1929 was to do very little. Unemployment became very high, with
one in three workers out of a job by 1932. The economy also shrank
dramatically in size at this time.
The economic policies followed by the governments of Weimar

were generally ineffective. However, they did have some
successes, for example in ending inflation and introducing a new,
stable currency in 1923. Furthermore, the inflationary policy
followed before this was not completely ineffective, as it reduced the
size of German debts and helped maintain employment. However,
the policies followed during the Depression after 1929 were not
generally effective. The government cut expenditure, which fuelled
unemployment further. The ineffectiveness of the economic policies
followed can be seen in the very high rate of unemployment by
1932, when one in three workers was without a job. In addition, the
government did not manage to stop bankruptcies and the shrinking
size of the German economy 1929–32. Measures that the
government took, such as public works schemes, were too little, too
late. Overall, the policies pursued by government in Weimar with
respect to the economy were only partially effective, and in the face
of the biggest challenge, the Depression, they were ineffective.
The collapse of democracy, 1930–33 (part
1)
The political impact of the Depression
The political system struggled to cope with the difficulties caused by
the Depression and parliamentary government faced a series of
crises.
• The Grand Coalition government led by Müller fell apart in 1930
when the parties in government disagreed over whether to cut
unemployment benefits as levels of unemployment rose.
• Following the collapse of the Grand Coalition, subsequent
governments were minority administrations which lacked Reichstag
support. Chancellor Brüning’s government failed to get Reichstag
support for its budget in July 1930 and governed by relying on
Article 48. Consequently, Hindenburg dissolved the Reichstag and
called a new election. Von Papen’s government lost a confidence
vote in 1932, while Schleicher’s government lasted for just a few
months.
• The German political system moved in a more authoritarian
direction in the years before Hitler became Chancellor. Brüning and
von Papen relied extensively on emergency presidential decrees
rather than on parliamentary government: there were 44 emergency
decrees issued under Article 48 in 1931, compared with just five in
1930, for example. Von Papen and Hindenburg also used Article 48
to seize control of regional government in Prussia, still the largest
and most populous German state, whose left-wing SPD government
they wished to crush.
• Politicians did not take effective action to deal with the Depression.
Brüning only started to act in June 1932 by launching modest
reflationary schemes; his actions can be characterised as too little,
too late. German people lost faith in their political system as
politicians failed to help them effectively.
• Democratic norms began to break down as political violence
returned to the streets of Germany. During the July 1932 election
campaign there were 461 riots in Prussia, in which a number of
people died. The SA were responsible for much of the violence as
they participated in battles against communists. Street violence
added to an air of instability in Germany, which served to increase
people’s discontent.
Weimar Chancellors 1928–33

• Hermann Müller: June 1932–March 1930
• Heinrich Brüning: March 1930–May 1932
• Franz von Papen: May 1932–November 1932
• Kurt von Schleicher: December 1932–January 1933
Spectrum of importance
Below are a sample exam question and a list of general points which
could be used to answer the question. Use your own knowledge and
the information on the opposite page to reach a judgement about the
importance of these general points to the question posed. Write
numbers on the spectrum below to indicate their relative importance.
Having done this, write a brief justification for your placement,
explaining why some of these factors are more important than
others. The resulting diagram could form the basis of an essay plan.
How far were economic factors the main reason for the
weakness of Weimar democracy in the years 1929–32?
1 Economic factors
2 Lack of public support for democracy
3 The actions of the conservative elite
4 The role of war and defeat
Turning assertion into argument

Below are a sample exam question and a series of assertions. Read
the exam question and then add a justification to each of the
assertions to turn it into an argument.
How far were economic factors the main reason for the
weakness of Weimar democracy by 1932?
The effects of the Depression in Germany had undermined

democracy there by 1932 because
___________________________
___________________________
In addition, the actions of some members of the conservative elite

undermined democracy in Germany by
___________________________
___________________________
Furthermore, the situation in which the Weimar Republic had been

founded arguably undermined democracy from the start in the
sense that
___________________________
___________________________
The growth of Nazi support
In 1928, the Nazis were a fringe party with minimal support and yet
only four years later they had become the most popular political party
in Germany, winning more than 37 per cent of the vote in the July
1932 election. The economic and political crisis that Germany
experienced made the Nazis and their message much more
appealing.
The Depression and subsequent political crisis provided an
opportunity for the Nazis. It was easy for them to attack the Weimar
government and more people were now open to hearing the Nazis’
message. As the Depression hit, the party’s electoral success
dramatically increased, as did the size of their membership, which
was around 2 million by early 1933. The SA grew from 70,000
members in 1931 to 170,000 in 1932. Members were attracted to Nazi
party organisations such as its young wing, the Hitler Jugend (Hitler
Youth). Uniforms, activities and hiking appealed to young members
while the frequently unemployed members of the SA were given a
sense of purpose and an outlet for some of their frustrations in the
violent ethos of the organisation.
Nazi party vote, Reichstag elections
Election date 1928 1930 July 1932*
Percentage of the vote 2.6% 18.3% 37.3%
Number of seats 12 107 230
*After these elections, the Nazi party was the largest in the Reichstag.
It was the Nazis’ popularity in elections and their creation of a mass-
membership organisation that put Hitler in contention for the
Chancellorship of Germany.
The demographics of Nazi voters and Nazi
members
• A much larger number of people voted for the Nazi party than were
members.
• Nazi members were most likely to be young (two-thirds of members
in 1930 were aged under 40) and male, partly because the party did
not encourage active female participation.
• Women were more likely to vote for the party than men, however.
Hitler had some success in appealing to women who had not
previously voted – traditionally minded conservative women who
had never liked democracy or Weimar.
• Catholics were less likely to support the party than Protestants as
the majority of Catholic voters always supported the Zentrum Party.
• Urban dwellers were less likely to vote for the Nazis.
• Working-class people formed the largest number of Nazi party
members at 31 per cent of members, but were on average less
likely to be a member of the party than most other social classes.
This apparent paradox can be accounted for, as the working class
formed by far the largest social group in Germany: 46 per cent of
the population were working class.
• In contrast, office workers and the self-employed were over-
represented as party members.
The impact of propaganda
Nazi propaganda was tailored to different audiences to try to
maximise their support. So, for example:
• messages about bread and work were deployed in working-class
areas
• messages about Weimar’s supposedly lax moral standards were
tailored to conservative mothers
• anti-Semitism was often emphasised in rural areas.
The Nazis used posters, leaflets, rallies and speeches to get their
message across, as well as modern technology such as radio and
film. Rallies were designed to provoke an emotional response in
participants through their orchestration of image, sound and emotive
messages. The Nazis also benefitted from their association with the
DNVP as their leader, Alfred Hugenberg, put his media empire of
various newspapers and radio stations at the service of Nazi
propagandists. The impact of propaganda was important, but it should
be noted that the Nazis’ vote increased dramatically even in areas
which they didn’t target with propaganda.
Hitler’s appeal
The Nazi head of propaganda, Joseph Goebbels, cultivated an
image for Hitler as Germany’s heroic saviour. The image of Hitler as a
strong, decisive leader in a time when politicians seemed weak and
ineffective was very appealing. This ‘Hitler myth’ helped to gain
support for Hitler and the Nazis. Hitler ran against Hindenburg in the
presidential election of 1932 and his campaign ‘Hitler over Germany’
portrayed him as dynamic and modern, harnessing modern
technology, such as radio, to put his message across, and travelling
via aeroplane from region to region to campaign. Despite his eventual
loss to Hindenburg, Hitler came second in the election and had
established himself as a credible political leader.
Establish criteria
criteria based on a key term, which you can use to reach and justify a
judgement.
How accurate is it to say that the main reason for the level of
support for the Nazi Party in Germany 1922–32 was the appeal
of Hitler?
Definition:
___________________________
___________________________
Criteria:
___________________________
___________________________
___________________________
Reach a judgement
Having defined the key term and established a series of criteria, you
should now make a judgement. Consider how far the level of support
the Nazis in Germany achieved was because of the appeal of Hitler,
according to the criteria. Summarise your judgements below.
Criteria 1:
___________________________
___________________________
Criteria 2:
___________________________
___________________________
Criteria 3:
___________________________
___________________________
The collapse of democracy, 1930–33 (part
2)
Hitler’s appointment to power
Hitler and the Nazis were able to capitalise upon the Depression and
political crisis to gain the support that put Hitler in contention for the
Chancellorship of Germany. President Hindenburg resisted appointing
Hitler after the July 1932 election, however, despite the Nazis electoral
success. Hitler was offered the vice-Chancellorship, but refused the
offer – he held out to become Chancellor. Mass popularity was not
sufficient for Hitler to be appointed and, crucially, it was the support
that he received from some members of the political and economic
elite that eventually led to his appointment.
• Pressure was applied on President Hindenburg by a number of
influential industrialists and bankers who in 1932 urged him to
appoint Hitler Chancellor. These included Hjalmar Schacht, the
architect of the scheme to restore the German currency in 1923,
and industrialists I. G. Farben and Krupp.
• Von Papen schemed against Chancellor von Schleicher, who was
appointed in November 1932. Von Papen and others around him,
such as Hindenburg’s son Oscar and his state secretary, Otto
Meissner, worked to persuade Hindenburg to appoint Hitler as
Chancellor. Von Papen’s plan involved his own appointment as
Vice-Chancellor – Nazi members of the Cabinet were to be a
minority. Von Papen wanted to use Hitler’s popular support to give
the legitimacy that his own government had lacked in 1932. Von
Papen assumed that he would be able to control Hitler and after
Hitler’s appointment he crowed, ‘We’ve hired him’.
• Many members of the conservative political and economic elite,
including Hugenberg and steel manufacturer Thyssen, contributed
to the Nazi party’s funds.
• As the state of economic and political crisis continued, many
conservatives feared a communist takeover – the KPD had seen its
vote share increase from 3.2 million in 1928 to 5.9 million in
November 1933. It was the Nazis’ determination to smash the
communists that caused some conservatives to back Hitler.
• Hindenburg eventually appointed Hitler to government in January.
This followed von Schleicher’s failed plan to attain an element of
popular legitimacy for his government by splitting the Nazi
movement and trying to work with trade unions. Von Papen’s
government had completely failed to gain Reichstag support, and
von Schleicher had no more success.
• Hindenburg at this point finally relented and appointed Hitler.
Despite a decline in the Nazis’ vote share in the November 1932
election (from 37 per cent to 32 per cent), the party was still the
largest in the Reichstag.
German conservatives
German conservatives were from the old Junker elite or the new
business class. Like the Nazis, they had nationalist leanings, a desire
for more authoritarian government and a hatred for socialists and
communists.
Factors in Hitler’s appointment to power
On 30 January 1933, Hitler was appointed as Chancellor of Germany,
with von Papen as Vice-Chancellor, in a cabinet that only contained
two other Nazi members.
The economic depression and the failure of politicians to deal
effectively with it gave Hitler an opportunity and caused more people
to listen to his message. Many were profoundly disillusioned with
Weimar democracy, which was not strongly entrenched and which
never appeared to have worked very effectively. The Nazis saw their
support rise dramatically until they were the most popular political
party. Supported by some conservatives who saw the Nazis as a way
of creating a populist authoritarian government, Hindenburg was
eventually persuaded to appoint Hitler as Chancellor.
Other factors contributing to Hitler’s appointment to power included:
• Hitler’s personal role (as a charismatic leader and tactician)
• Nazi propaganda
• SA violence.
Identify the concept

Below are four sample exam questions based on some of the
following concepts:
• Cause – questions concern the reasons for something, or why
something happened
• Consequence – questions concern the impact of an event, an
action or a policy
• Change/continuity – questions ask you to investigate the extent
to which things changed or stayed the same
• Similarity/difference – questions ask you to investigate the extent
to which two events, actions or policies were similar
• Significance – questions concern the importance of an event, an
action or a policy.
Read each of the questions and work out which of the concepts they
are based on.
How far do you agree that Weimar democracy was always likely
to fail?
How accurate is it to say that the rise in unemployment was the

most important consequence of the economic problems that
Germany faced 1922–32?
How accurate is it to say that the lack of support for democracy

from Weimar’s elite was responsible for Hitler’s appointment to
power?
How far did the level of support for democracy in Germany

change in the years 1919–32?
Developing an argument
Below is a sample exam question, a list of key points that could be
made to partially answer the question, and a paragraph from the
essay. Read the question, the partial plan and the sample paragraph.
Rewrite the paragraph in order to develop an argument. Your
paragraph should answer the question directly and set out the
evidence that supports your argument. Crucially, it should develop an
argument by setting out a general answer to the question and the
reasons that support it.
How far did the level of support for democracy in Germany
Key points:
• Lack of support for democracy in the years of Weimar – post First
World War
• Increase in support for democracy as the political and economic
situation improved mid-1920s
• Decline in support for democracy after 1929 – economic, social
and political effects of the Depression
Sample paragraph
The level of support varied. From 1924, the economic and political
situation began to stabilise. The new currency was stable, and
inflation had been brought under control. The Dawes Plan of 1924
saw American money invested in Germany, and the economy and
prosperity grew. Unemployment, while never that low, was not a
major problem. In politics, there were no further attempted putsches
after the November 1923 Munich Putsch and no further major
political assassinations. Politicians, such as Stresemann, who had
been opposed to Weimar democracy in the early years of the
Republic, now were working hard to support it. All of this caused
support to grow.
Exam focus
Below is a Level 5 answer to an A-level question. Read it and the
comments around it.
How accurate is it to say that by 1929, Germany was
economically strong and politically stable?
To some extent Germany was economically strong and politically

stable by 1929, although the outward signs of strength and stability
masked serious underlying problems. By 1929, the country appeared
to have recovered economically from the First World War, and the
political situation seemed more stable than in the early years of the
Republic. However, economic dependence on America and the
fragility of Weimar democracy were serious weaknesses.
This introduction directly addresses the question.
In some respects, Germany was politically stable by 1929,

particularly in comparison with the early years of the Weimar
Republic. Political violence had dramatically reduced and political
assassinations no longer occurred. The murder of key democratic
politicians, such as Erzberger and Rathenau, in the early years of the
Republic had created an atmosphere of instability and fear. By 1929,
however, public opposition to the extremists who were responsible
for the assassinations had caused them to cease, which increased
the strength and stability of Germany at this time. In addition, the
attempted Putsches and revolutions that had occurred in Germany
between 1919 and 1923, such as the Kapp Putsch of 1920, had also
now stopped. The political system seemed stronger and more stable
as, by 1929, there were no longer violent attempts to overthrow it.
The Weimar political system was also more widely accepted at this
time by the public than had been the case before 1924. A sizeable
majority of people now supported pro-democracy parties, unlike in
the first years of Weimar, and in the 1928 election, the anti-
democratic fascist Nazi Party only received 2.8 per cent of the vote.
Politics in Germany also seemed more stable by 1929 in that political
parties from the left and the right were able to come together and
form a strong coalition government in Müller’s ‘Grand Coalition’ in
1928. This socialist-led government included some right-wing parties
and politicians, and unlike many of the previous governments of
Weimar it was able to command a secure majority in the Reichstag.
Before 1928, governments in Weimar had often been unstable and
short-lived coalitions, and politicians struggled to co-operate with
each other. The accession to power of the Grand Coalition seemed
to show that German politics was now in a period of stability.
Accurate detail is used.
In economic terms, Germany appeared to be fairly strong by 1929.

The hyperinflation crisis of 1923 was long over, and inflation had not
returned as a significant problem. The economy was growing and its
size had recovered to pre-war levels. Furthermore, unemployment
was relatively low, and certainly not at the problematic levels that it
was later to reach. By 1929, the German economy had received a
large amount of investment and loans, particularly from the United
States, and new sectors of the economy, such as chemicals,
experienced strong growth. Wages in Germany also grew during the
1920s so that by 1929, most people’s standards of living had
improved compared to the immediately post-war period. Thus in
economics, by 1929, Germany appeared fairly strong and stable,
with a growing economy and a high level of investment.
Despite all of these positive developments, by 1929 Germany was
not as strong and stable as it appeared. Even if the level of public
support for the Weimar system had increased, there were still many
people who supported anti-Weimar parties. The Communists, for
example, received about 10 per cent of the vote. In 1929, the
increase in support for Weimar was a fairly recent development,
which was a source of possible instability. The persistence of a
minority hostile to Weimar also suggested this. Another political issue
that reduced the strength and stability of Germany was that support
for Weimar’s democratic system among many powerful people was
not very strong. Judges, for example, had shown this in the lenient
sentences that were handed down to those who tried to overthrow
the system during the Kapp and Munich Putsches. Many in the army
and the upper classes were also not strong supporters of democracy.
By 1929 some industrialists were becoming increasingly hostile to
the Weimar system, feeling that it had benefitted workers too much.
All of this created instability within Germany.
The other side of the argument is explained and considered.
In some ways, Germany’s economy was not strong and stable at all,
in spite of positive developments up to 1929. Unemployment may not
have been as high as it later became but it remained persistent, and
economic growth was not that strong compared with other similar
countries, such as Britain and France. In some areas, such as
agriculture, depression had started in 1927, causing political
frustration and hardship in rural areas. In the 1928 elections the Nazi
Party managed to pick up a considerable number of votes in those
areas affected, although they did not do well overall. A major
potential source of weakness and instability by 1929 were the huge
levels of loans that had flowed into Germany from the United States
due to the Dawes Plan of 1924. This money had allowed greater
investment in industry and made it easier for Germany to meet its
reparations payments. However, it created a great and unstable
dependence on the United States, which ultimately proved disastrous
for the German economy after the effects of the Depression started
to hit in late 1929.
Overall, there were many positive developments in Germany by 1929
which did indicate that, at least compared to the early years of the
Weimar Republic, Germany was fairly strong and stable. Politics was
more peaceful and effective and the Weimar system was more
widely supported. The economy was growing and the inflation
problem had been solved. However, significant numbers of people
were still opposed to Weimar’s system, and some powerful people,
including high-ranking members of the army, were not supporters of
democracy. The economy also had a dangerous dependence on US
money. Germany was not therefore, entirely strong and stable by
1929.
This essay scores highly as it is very focused upon the

question and establishes criteria to assess the issue of
whether Germany was strong and stable by 1929. The
essay also contains accurate detail and a clear and well-
sustained argument in answer to the question.
Reverse engineering
The best essays are based on careful plans. Read the essay and the
comments and try to work out the general points of the plan used to
write the essay. Once you have done this, note down the specific
examples used to support each general point.
AS-level questions
Were political divisions the main reason for the failure of the
Weimar Republic in the years 1919–33?
Was outrage over the Treaty of Versailles the main reason for
opposition to the Weimar Republic in the years 1919–32?
How far do you agree that economic problems were responsible

for political instability in the Weimar Republic in the years 1918–
32?
2 Nazi Germany, 1933–45
Establishing a dictatorship
When Hitler was appointed Chancellor in January 1933, he was not
dictator of Germany. By March 1933, Hitler had removed many of his
political opponents, ended democracy and was dictator. Some have
argued the state was now totalitarian. A number of events helped
Hitler:
The Reichstag Fire, 27 February 1933
A communist, Marinus van der Lubbe, is thought to have set fire to the
Reichstag building. Hitler and the Nazis stated that the fire was a
communist conspiracy, when in fact the evidence points to van der
Lubbe acting alone.
The Reichstag Fire Decree, 28 March 1933

Following the fire, President Hindenburg issued a decree (the Law for
the Protection of People and State, or Reichstag Fire Decree), which
suspended the civil rights parts of the Weimar constitution. The police
and secret police now had the right to arrest people for any reason or
none, and people could be held in captivity indefinitely. Mass arrests
of communists, socialists and trade unionists followed.
Elections, 5 March 1933

The Reichstag elections of March 1933 were conducted in an
atmosphere of violence and intimidation. The result was an increased
vote share for the Nazis (43.5 per cent) and a Reichstag majority for
the Nazi Party and their supporters. The SA harassed and attacked
the KPD and SPD and many members of the KPD had been arrested
before the election.
The opening of Dachau, 20 March 1933

Dachau, near Munich, was the first concentration camp. The Nazis’
political opponents were imprisoned there.
Potsdam Day, 21 March 1933

A ‘day of national unity’ was held at Potsdam. Hindenburg and Hitler
appeared before huge crowds together, to send out a message of
Nazi and conservative unity.
The Enabling Act, 24 March 1933

Hitler now moved to take dictatorial powers, and asked the Reichstag
to pass a law which would give him the power to rule by decree. The
Enabling Act was passed by 444 votes to 94, with only the SPD
opposing it. Members of the KPD were banned.
Factors enabling Nazi consolidation of
power
Terror
• 100,000 political opponents of the Nazi party were imprisoned
between 1933 and 1934.
• Concentration camps were opened and, in Berlin, hundreds of
socialists who resisted arrest were murdered.
• The KPD were banned shortly after the Reichstag Fire, trade unions
were all closed down on 1 May 1933, the SPD was banned in June
1933 and all other political parties were banned from July 1933.
• Hundreds of left-wing newspapers were closed.
In July 1934, Hitler ordered the murder of a number of political
opponents and even supporters who he believed to be a threat, such
as Ernst Röhm of the SA, on the Night of the Long Knives.
The support of the conservative elite

The Nazis consolidated their power thanks to the support of their
conservative allies in the Reichstag. Further support from the
conservative elite came from many industrialists who bankrolled the
Nazis during the March 1933 election.
Propaganda
Goebbels’s propaganda portrayed the government’s actions as
necessary to deal with a national emergency. Potsdam Day was an
orchestrated piece of propaganda aimed at demonstrating the unity
and popularity of the government.
An illusion of moderation
The Reichstag Fire Decree and Enabling Act gave created a (false)
impression of the legality of the Nazis’ actions. In addition, the
Concordat with the Catholic Church of 20 July 1933 was designed to
reassure Catholics.
Gleichschaltung
The Nazis also consolidated power through a process of
Gleichschaltung, or co-ordination. A law of 7 April 1933 removed
Jews and political opponents of the Nazis from the civil service,
schools and courts. A Nazi labour organisation, the Deutsche
Arbeitsfront (DAF) was established. The Nazis also moved to seize
control of local government.
importance of these general points to the question posed. Write
numbers on the spectrum below to indicate their relative importance.
Having done this, write a brief justification of your placement,
explaining why some of these factors are more important than
others. The resulting diagram could form the basis of an essay plan.
How significant was the use of terror in the years 1933–34 in
establishing the power of the Nazi regime?
1. Impact of the Reichstag Fire
2. The Enabling Act
3. Imprisonment and execution of opponents
4. Propaganda
5. Support given by conservatives and Catholics
Develop the detail

How far do you agree that the Nazi regime in 1933 was a
totalitarian state?
In many respects the Nazi regime in 1933 could be described as a

totalitarian state. In the early period of Nazi rule, the Nazis
eliminated much of the opposition to their rule and created a
dictatorship which had totalitarian features. The opposition were
persecuted and many freedoms were removed. People were not
able to protest or oppose. The Nazis created a one-party state and
Hitler was given dictatorial powers after the Reichstag Fire. In these
ways, the basis for a totalitarian state was established in 1933.
The nature of Nazi government, 1933–39
A totalitarian state?
In the aftermath of the Second World War, the image of the Nazi state
was of an efficient and highly organised system, run on strictly
hierarchical lines, with all power concentrated in Hitler’s hands. The
Nazi state was viewed as totalitarian – it had total control over all
aspects of society, and was organised to reflect Hitler’s will, which was
the basis for law after the Enabling Act was passed.
A chaotic state?
Since the 1960s, however, this interpretation of Hitler’s power and the
working of the Nazi state has been challenged by historical evidence
suggesting that the organisation and decision-making processes of
the state were in fact chaotic and inefficient. There were no clear
decision-making procedures, and often no clear lines of accountability.
Structures were often duplicated and overlapping in their functions,
creating inefficiency. From 1936, for example, the Office of the Four
Year Plan had created economic policy at the same time as the
Economics Ministry retained responsibility for it. Several Nazi leaders
were able to build up vast power, and often competed with one
another for dominance. The Nazi party bureaucracy sometimes
competed with the state institutions like government ministries and the
independent Gauleiter who were only accountable to Hitler.
The nature and extent of Hitler’s power
In the Nazi state, all decisions were supposed to emanate from Hitler.
However, the chaotic state and Hitler’s own haphazard methods of
working meant that he did not always control decision-making and for
this reason, some historians have questioned the idea that Hitler was
an all-powerful dictator. Very few direct orders seemed to have come
from Hitler, who only issued 34 decrees during his 12 years in power.
Where Hitler was particularly interested in policy, he did take a
dominant role, however. In foreign policy, Hitler steered policy by first
rejecting the Treaty of Versailles and then by developing expansionist
plans. In 1936, Hitler took the decision to remilitarise the Rhineland
against the advice of his generals, and he was instrumental in the
process of Anschluss in 1938. It was Hitler’s decision to push forward
with an expansionist policy in Eastern Europe in the late 1930s.
‘Working towards the Führer’
In other areas, while Hitler did not always make direct decisions,
policy was developed which reflected his wishes. It has been argued
that many people within the Nazi state took decisions by ‘working
towards the Führer’ – that is, as Hitler’s will was the source of law and
authority and where there was an absence of a clear decision from
Hitler, people sought to anticipate what Hitler would want and
formulate policy on this basis. By this process, policy developed in the
words of one Nazi bureaucrat, ‘along the lines that the Führer would
wish’.
Examples of ‘working towards the Führer’

• Goering was prepared to enact Hitler’s aim of a Wehrwirtschaft,
war economy. He was given far-reaching powers by Hitler over
economic policy as Head of the Office of the Four Year Plan in
1936. In contrast, Hjalmar Schacht, the Finance Minister, who had
previously dominated economic policy, was sidelined after this
time, as he did not want to devote the same level of resources to
rearmament that Hitler wanted.
• Goebbels orchestrated Kristallnacht partly because he was out of
favour with Hitler following an affair with a Czech actress (Czechs
were considered racially inferior by Hitler). He attempted to win
favour with Hitler by ‘working towards’ him.
Simple essay style

Below is a sample exam question. Use your own knowledge and the
information on the opposite page to produce a plan for this question.
Choose four general points, and provide three pieces of specific
information to support each general point.
Once you have planned your essay, write the introduction and
conclusion for the essay. The introduction should list the points to be
discussed in the essay. The conclusion should summarise the key
points and justify which point was the most important.
How accurate is it to say that, in the years 1933–39, Germany
was a totalitarian state under Hitler’s complete control?
Recommended reading
Below is a list of suggested further reading on the topic of the Nazi
state.
• Ian Kershaw, ‘Working Towards the Führer – Reflections on the
Nature of the Hitler Dictatorship’ in The Third Reich, Christian Leitz
(ed.) (1999), pages 231–52
• Richard J. Evans, The Third Reich in Power (2006), pages 20–81
• Ian Kershaw, The Nazi Dictatorship – Problems and Perspectives
of Interpretation (new edition, 2015), pages 81–108
Support for the Nazi regime
A consensus dictatorship?
Historians have debated whether the Nazi system was one based on
popular support – a consensus dictatorship – or whether, in fact, the
Nazi regime’s power rested on repression and terror.
Evidence that the regime was popular
There were no significant attempts to overthrow the regime in the
1930s and underground opposition did not have widespread support
during this era. Historian Robert Gellately has argued that the regime
can be said to be a ‘consensus dictatorship’ because it relied so
heavily on collaboration from ordinary people who were supportive of
the Nazi regime. A series of plebiscites that were held in Nazi
Germany tend to indicate that people supported Hitler’s policies,
although their results were not reliable and they were not free or fair
votes.
Date Plebiscite question % in
favour
1934 Do you endorse Hitler taking over Hindenburg’s 90%
remaining powers on Hindenburg’s death?
1936 Do you support the remilitarisation of the Rhineland? 99%
1938 Do you support the union of Germany and Austria 99%
(Anschluss)?
Reasons for support for the regime
Why would people support a system with such abhorrent values?
• Perceptions of the Weimar years were very negative. The Nazi
regime seemed to bring greater stability to the lives of many
Germans.
• Some Nazi policies, such as foreign policy, may have been popular
and some of their policies did improve the lives of some Germans.
Unemployment fell and economic growth resumed by 1935. Some
Nazi social policies also improved the standard of living for certain
groups of people. Non-Jewish pregnant women were given free
health care, for example.
• The propaganda that people were subjected to may have been
effective. A Ministry of Popular Enlightenment and Propaganda led
by Joseph Goebbels had been established in 1933, and after this
Goebbels worked hard to create an image of Hitler as a saviour of
Germany. The annual Nuremberg Rally became a showcase for
Nazi power. Censorship went alongside propaganda – newspaper
editors were accountable to the Propaganda Ministry for what they
published and the content of newsreels was controlled. Radio was
used to propagate Nazi messages.
Support during wartime
Despite evidence that many Germans were not wholly in favour of the
decision to go to war in 1939, early successes helped to bolster
morale and support for the regime. However, particularly following the
Battle of Stalingrad (1942–43), support declined and more opposition
began to emerge.
A number of measures helped to maintain support for the regime early
on in the war.
• Until 1944, rations were in excess of the minimum calories required,
and extra rations were given at Christmas and for those in
strenuous jobs.
• Early victories in Poland, Norway, Denmark, Luxembourg, Belgium
and France helped to maintain morale.
• Hitler resisted Albert Speer’s calls later in the war to mobilise
women. This may have helped morale.
Declining support
After 1942 evidence suggests that people were sometimes critical of
Hitler and that non-conformity and cynicism were rife. Many people in
the Hitler Youth were disaffected. Factors that caused support for the
regime to weaken included the following.
• Working conditions were difficult – hours at work increased,
particularly in armaments factories.
• Some young people reacted negatively to the militarisation of the
Hitler Youth after 1939.
• Defeat at Stalingrad could not be covered up by the regime, as the
scale of the losses was so great.
• Allied bombing of German cities seems to have weakened morale in
some areas, such as in the Rhineland. In total, Allied bombing in
Germany killed 305,000 people, injured 780,000 and destroyed 2
million homes.
• The Soviet advance from 1943 worried the German public, who
feared Russian invasion.
• The 1944 rocket campaign against south eastern England and
Allied ports like Antwerp failed to have a decisive impact on the
course of the war and caused morale to decline.
Even at this stage, however, there was no widespread rebellion
against Nazi rule.

the judgement.
How far do you agree that Nazi propaganda was the main
reason for widespread popular support for Hitler’s regime in the
years 1933–45?
The Nazi regime was supported by many people in Germany for a
variety of reasons, and while propaganda helped to strengthen
support, this was only one reason for it.
___________________________
___________________________
The support that many people had for the Nazi regime was a result
of the Nazis’ effective use of propaganda
___________________________
___________________________
Tip: whichever option you choose, you will have to weigh up both

How accurate is it to say that the Nazi regime enjoyed
widespread support in the years 1933–45?
The plebiscites held in the Germany in the 1930s may indicate that
the regime enjoyed support because
___________________________
___________________________
Collaboration with the regime was widespread, which shows that

___________________________
___________________________
Opposition to the Nazi regime was limited in the period 1933–45

which suggests that
___________________________
___________________________
Opposition and dissent
Was the regime really popular?
Some historians have opposed the idea that the Nazi state was a
consensus dictatorship. Some evidence from SOPADE, the Gestapo
and Sicherheitsdienst (the SS’s secret police, the SD) reports
indicates that people did not always wholeheartedly support the
regime. Furthermore, the level of opposition increased after 1942,
when Germany began to struggle in the war.
Opposition, non-conformity and resistance
Some evidence suggests that civil disobedience and non-conformity
to Nazi ideals, such as listening to jazz, were common. Different
methods of opposition include:
• active resistance – such as attempts to overthrow the regime
• protest – such as criticism of an aspect of Nazi policy
• non-conformity – failure to adhere to Nazi ideals.
There was very little active resistance, a little protest and significant
levels of non-conformity in Nazi Germany. People did not always pull
together in a unified Volksgemeinschaft in quite the way that the
Nazis wished, but neither did many people want to actually get rid of
the regime.
Opposition groups
The Edelweiss Pirates
The Edelweiss Pirates were youth groups that were explicitly anti-
Nazi. They wore banned uniforms and attacked the Hitler Youth while
also holding their own activities for young people. During the Second
World War, some members engaged in illegal activities such as
sabotage.
The Swing Youth

The Swing Youth were non-conformists who listened to American jazz
and dressed in an unconventional manner.
The Catholic Church

The Catholic Church continued to speak out where they felt their
interests or values were threatened. In 1937, Catholic priests read out
an encyclical from the Pope (‘With Burning Concern’) which
condemned some Nazi ideas. In 1941 large protests against an order
to remove crucifixes from Bavarian schools caused the order to be
reversed. Bishop Galen attacked the Aktion T4 ‘euthanasia’
programme and its existence was subsequently covered up. Galen
was placed under house arrest.
Protestant churchmen
Individual Protestant churchmen attacked the regime. Dietrich
Bonhoeffer spoke out against the regime and was arrested in 1943
and executed in 1945.
The White Rose

The White Rose student group was formed in Munich in 1942. The
movement urged Germans to reject Nazi values on ethical grounds
and reject the destructive path that the Nazis were following. The
group distributed anti-Nazi letters and leaflets. Brother and sister Hans
and Sophie Scholl were beheaded for their activities in the movement
in 1943.
Left-wing resistance
There was some active underground resistance on the left, as hidden
groups engaged in sabotage and created underground networks of
safehouses and information. In the summer of 1941 there were 89
resistance cells in factories in Berlin. There were also communist
groups in Hamburg and Mannheim and various active socialist
groups, such as Red Patrol. The communist network, the Red
Orchestra (Rote Kappelle), collected intelligence and engaged in the
distribution of anti-Nazi leaflets. The network was uncovered and
destroyed by the military intelligence in 1942.
Conservative resistance
A number of conservative opposition groups formed to seek a
restoration of the rule of law and an end to the war. The Kreisau Circle
was a conservative group led by Junker Helmuth Graf von Moltke. By
the end of the war the group had contacts with the left-wing opposition
and opponents of the regime in the army.
Resistance in the army

After Stalingrad, some army officers rejected the regime and sought to
overthrow it. In the 1944 Bomb Plot, an army group tried to
assassinate Hitler and seize power. Assassin von Stauffenberg’s
bomb did not kill Hitler, however, and the plot was uncovered. In total,
22 generals were executed and Field Marshall Rommel was prevailed
upon to commit suicide.
How far do you agree that there was very little opposition to the
Nazis between 1934 and 1945?
Support Challenge
Active resistance to the Nazi regime was
rare in the 1930s
Non-conformity and dissent were relatively
widespread
There were some instances of protest
against Nazi policies
SOPADE reports suggest a high level of
support for Hitler
There were some opposition groups, such
as the Edelweiss Pirates and left-wing
underground networks
The Bomb Plot was an attempt to overthrow
the Nazi regime in 1944

How far do you agree that there was very little opposition to the
Nazis between 1934 and 1945?
Active opposition to the Nazi regime was minimal, particularly in the

1930s, and there is evidence from the secret reports of the Social
Democratic Party that Hitler and some of his policies were popular.
There were no concerted attempts to overthrow the regime at this
time, and examples of public protest were rare. However, there
were some public protests, such as the occasion in 1937 when
Catholic priests read out an encyclical by the Pope, ‘With Burning
Concern’, which condemned some Nazi ideas. Furthermore, there
were some opposition groups, such as the Edelweiss Pirates and
the communist Red Orchestra, although the membership of such
groups was very small. In addition, lower-level opposition was much
more common, as many people failed to conform to Nazi ideals and
complained about Nazi policies. Overall, in the 1930s
___________________________
___________________________
___________________________
Terror and repression
It could be argued that historians who focus on the idea of a
‘consensus dictatorship’ understate the scale of the terror. One reason
for the lack of opposition to the Nazis was the scale of brutal
repression launched in the period of their consolidation in 1933–34
when 100,000 people were held in camps. In June 1934, terror was
also used against some potential right-wing opponents of the regime
during and after the Night of the Long Knives.
The terror state
There were many impediments to people resisting the Nazis:
• The Nazis established a system of concentration camps to house
undesirable elements.
• The Nazis ran an extensive network of terror and repression. From
1936, the head of the Schutzstaffel (SS), Heinrich Himmler, was
in charge of a huge security network including the SS, security
service, the police and the security police (including the Gestapo).
• The courts were used to suppress opposition in the mid-1930s. In
1935, 5,000 people were convicted for high treason, the prison
population increased by 53,000 and 23,000 inmates of prisons were
classed as political prisoners.
• People had no civil rights or freedom: the Reichstag Fire Decree
(see page 38) removed the Weimar constitution’s protections in this
area. People lost the rights to freedom of speech and freedom of
assembly and so had little power to organise any kind of opposition.
The Gestapo could arrest and hold people in custody for any reason
or none, while a law of 24 April 1933 made beheading the penalty
for seeking to reduce Hitler’s power.
• The Gestapo may have been small in number, but their network of
informants made it hard for people to speak out. The regime kept an
eye on people via agents such as party officials and Block
Wardens who monitored their local areas for signs of deviancy.
• People were not free to express discontent or opposition to the
Nazis in the plebiscites of the 1930s, which were conducted in an
atmosphere of intimidation.
• Gleichschaltung meant that the Nazis were in control of most
aspects of the state and that people who might potentially oppose
them had been removed. So, for example, in April 1933 the Law for
the Restoration of the Civil Service purged the civil service, and all
trade unions were abolished on 1 May 1933, replaced with a Nazi
organisation, the DAF. In July 1933, all other political parties were
abolished.
Was the Nazi state a consensus
dictatorship?
It is difficult to sustain the argument that the Nazi state was fully a
consensus dictatorship, given that people so completely lacked
freedom and were subject to terror and propaganda. The lack of
active opposition may be accounted for by the success of the initial
Nazi efforts to smash their political opponents. There is also evidence
that non-conformity and civil disobedience were widespread.
However, evidence also seems to suggest that there were high levels
of support for Hitler personally and that many people credited the
Nazis with certain successes.
The picture that emerges is complex. Levels of support may have
varied at different times, and equally an individual may have
collaborated at certain points, while objecting to Nazi policies on other
occasions. Non-conformity is difficult to interpret. Its widespread
existence supports the idea that the Nazis did not succeed in
completely controlling the population. Expressions of non-conformity
did not necessarily indicate that a person was completely opposed to
the existence of the Nazi regime, however.
Spot the mistake

114 will help you.
How far do you agree that the Nazi regime relied entirely upon
terror to maintain its control in the years 1933–45?
The Nazi regime relied to a significant extent on terror in the 1930s.

The Nazis established a system of concentration camps to house
undesirable elements. They also ran an extensive network of terror
and repression. From 1936, the head of the Schutzstaffel (SS),
Heinrich Himmler, was in charge of a huge security network
including the SS, security service, the police and the security police
(including the Gestapo). Block Wardens monitored people in their
local areas for signs of deviancy. Furthermore, the courts were used
to suppress opposition in the mid-1930s. In 1935, 5,000 people
were convicted for high treason, the prison population increased by
53,000 and 23,000 inmates of prisons were classed as political
prisoners. In addition, people had no civil rights or freedom: the
Reichstag Fire Decree removed the Weimar constitution’s
protections in this area.
the information provided on the opposite page, decide whether these
How far do you agree that the Nazi regime relied mainly upon
popular support for its power in the years 1933–45?
Support Challenge
In 1935, 5,000 people in Germany were
convicted of high treason
100,000 people were held in concentration
camps by the Nazis after they gained power
Block Wardens monitored people on behalf
of the Nazi party
The Gestapo often relied on denunciations
from the public
There is evidence that many Nazi policies
were popular
Origins
Europe had a long history of Christian anti-Semitic attacks on Jewish
communities, known as pogroms. While in most parts of Europe the
Enlightenment period had seen improvements in the rights of Jews,
in certain areas, such as Tsarist Russia, Jews remained oppressed
and pogroms occasionally still occurred. At the turn of the twentieth
century, old prejudices against Jews fused with new pseudo-scientific
racial ideas (see page 20) and the idea that the Jews were racially
inferior began to influence anti-Semitic extremists.
Racial ideas were at the heart of everything that the Nazis did. They
aimed to create a ‘racially pure’ master race in an expanded and
dominant Germany. The ‘racial’ strength of Aryan Germans was
viewed as the key to establishing a strong Germany. Groups seen as
harmful to German racial strength were classed as ‘outsiders’ and
subject to persecution. In Nazi Germany, the doctrine of Aryan racial
supremacy had dangerous consequences for Jews and other people
who did not fit into the Nazis’ conception of a master race. The
ultimate result was genocide and mass murder during the Second
World War.
Persecution of Jews in Europe – timeline
Year Persecution affecting Jews
1933 1 April – boycott of Jewish shops
April – all Jews except war veterans removed from the civil
service
1935 September – The Nuremburg Laws banned ‘intermarriage’;
Jews removed from German citizenship
1938 March – Violent attacks on Jews and Jewish property
following Anschluss; 45,000 Austrian Jews forced to emigrate
November – Kristallnacht: anti-Jewish attacks on thousands of
businesses and synagogues; 25,000 Jewish men sent to
concentration camps
Aryanisation began; Jewish property seized; Jews banned
from German economic life
1939 January – Reich Central Office for Emigration established to
promote emigration of Jews out of Europe
Policies towards other outsider groups
Other groups who were considered ‘outsider’ groups and excluded on
‘racial’ grounds from the Volksgemeinschaft included:
• Gypsies (Roma and Sinti) – this group was the first to be murdered
because of ‘racial’ identity. When the Second World War broke out,
German Gypsies were deported to Poland. In 1940, a group of
Roma children at Buchenwald was the first to be gassed in a
concentration camp.
• Disabled people – the Nazis wanted only people that they classed
as ‘racially fit’ in the Third Reich, and the 1933 Law for the
Prevention of Hereditarily Diseased Offspring permitted compulsory
sterilisation for those with hereditary conditions. In 1939, the Aktion
T4 scheme was launched, in which disabled babies and children
were murdered.
• Homosexuals – gay people were subject to Nazi persecution partly
because they were viewed as resisting the Nazi desire for all Aryans
to breed. In 1936, a Reich Central Office for the Combating of
Homosexuality was established. Approximately 15,000 German gay
people were imprisoned.
In addition, from the mid-1930s the Nazis’ political enemies and
asocials (people who did not conform to Nazi social ideals) were
often imprisoned in concentration camps, including the homeless and
alcoholics.
Mind map
map below.
Develop the detail
detail. Annotate the paragraph to add detail to the answer.
How far do you agree that Nazi policies towards Jews became
ever more extreme in the years 1933–45?
To a significant extent, Nazi policies towards Jews became more

extreme over time. When the party first came to power Hitler was
fairly cautious in pursuing his more ideological and extreme ideas.
Despite this, measures were taken in 1933 to prevent Jewish
people from working within the government. Nazi policy became
more extreme in 1935, when steps were taken to restrict marriages
between Jews and non-Jews, and to define who was Jewish and
exclude these people from citizenship. The year of the Berlin
Olympics, 1936, saw Nazi policies and discrimination towards
Jewish people reduce, as the Party tried to create a positive
impression internationally. In this sense, Nazi policies towards
Jewish people did not increase at this point. However, in 1938
persecution increased again, as Jewish property was increasingly
confiscated, and during Kristallnacht there was widespread and
orchestrated violence against Jewish people, property and
synagogues, and mass arrests of Jewish men.
Nazi policies towards women
Nazi ideas about women
In Weimar Germany many women had paid employment, but the
Nazis believed that women should not work. Nazi officials said that
women should focus upon their traditional role as homemakers and
childbearers, summarised in the slogan ‘Kinder, Küche, Kirche’
(‘children, kitchen, church’). The Nazis’ attitude partly resulted from a
desire to build a healthy master race – it was felt that the birth rate
must increase, and reducing the number of working women would, it
was believed, help with male unemployment.
Nazi policies
Nazi policies towards women were aimed at promoting marriage,
births and women’s traditional roles (and, thus, reducing female
employment).
• Loans could be obtained by married couples. These were partially
converted into gifts upon the birth of each child.
• Maternity benefits and family allowances were improved, and taxes
were reduced for those with children.
• Contraception advice was restricted and anti-abortion laws
enforced.
• Propaganda promoted idealised images of mothers, and honorary
crosses were awarded to those with large families (a gold cross was
awarded for having eight children).
• To reduce female employment, women were banned from working
in many professional industries, such as medicine and law. Women
who left employment to get married could obtain an interest-free
loan of 600 Rentenmarks. Propaganda campaigns encouraged
women to leave employment and employers to favour men.
• Women were restricted to only 10 per cent of university places.
The results of Nazi policies towards women
The results of Nazi policies in this area were mixed. The birth rate
rose from 14.7 per 1,000 Germans in 1933 to 20.3 per 1,000 in 1939
and the proportion of women in the labour force decreased from 37
per cent in 1933 to 33 per cent in 1939. However, more women
actually worked, as the labour force in Germany expanded at during
this time – rapid rearmament was not really feasible without female
labour. Measures to restrict female employment affected small
numbers of middle-class, educated women. Additionally, the rate of
marriages did not increase significantly during the 1930s. Where the
Nazis achieved their aims (for example, in a rising birth rate) it is
difficult to establish whether this was due to their policies or other
factors, such as rising prosperity which encouraged more people to
have children.
Nazi women’s organisations

Women were barred from most areas of the Nazi party ruling
structures, but could participate in the National Socialist Womanhood
(NSF) and the German Women’s Enterprise (DFW). These
organisations were not really designed to encourage female
participation in politics, however – they existed to promote Nazi
ideology regarding women’s role.
How far do you agree that the role of women in Germany in the
years 1919–39 changed completely as a result of Nazi policies?
Support Challenge
Some young women in Weimar Germany
lived independent, self-supporting lives
The Nazis discouraged women from working
and restricted women’s places at university
to 10 per cent
The Nazis encouraged and incentivised
women to stay at home and have children
The number of women working increased
during the 1930s
Most women had a traditional role within the
family during the Weimar era
Women were banned from many
professional occupations during the Nazi era

How far do you agree that the position of women in Germany
between 1919 and 1939 changed completely as a result of Nazi
policies?
It was harder for women to live independent lives in Germany at the

time of the Nazis because
___________________________
___________________________
The position of professional women in Germany changed as a

result of Nazi policies because
___________________________
___________________________
The working lives of women in Germany was not completely altered

by Nazi policies as
___________________________
___________________________
Nazi policies may have affected women’s role as mothers in that

___________________________
___________________________
Nazi education and cultural policies
Nazi ideas about children and education
For the Nazis, children were central to providing the future ‘master
race’. The Nazis felt that children could be indoctrinated with Nazi
ideas, education should be harnessed to serve the state and Nazi
ideology and that children should be conscripted to build the
movement and to provide future soldiers and mothers.
Nazi educational policies
Jewish teachers and teachers considered to be politically dubious
were removed from their jobs in 1933. Remaining teachers were
encouraged to join a Nazi Teachers’ League, and could be sent on
retraining schemes to educate them in Nazi ideas on education. The
curriculum was altered to reflect Nazi values, including a nationalist
version of German history and, in biology, a focus on Nazi racial
ideas, such as racial hierarchy and eugenics. The educational
curriculum was also used to reinforce traditional gender roles, with
boys encouraged to participate in tough physical training and girls
undertaking classes in cookery.
Nazi youth organisations
Youth organisations were designed to indoctrinate children in Nazi
ideology and train them for their roles in Nazi Germany.
• The Hitler Youth (HJ) was formed in 1926. The HJ offered activities
such as hiking and camping and also, increasingly, military training.
Membership was made compulsory in March 1939. The increasing
militarisation of the HJ reduced its popularity during the Second
World War.
• The League of German Maidens (BDM) organised sporting activities
and camping trips as well as training girls in their role as future
homemakers. During the war, members of the BDM volunteered to
help with charity collections and in hospitals. Later, BDM members
were involved in anti-aircraft activities (attacks from the ground on
enemy aircraft).
The impact of Nazi policies towards
children and education
Nazi educational policies caused a decline of educational standards,
partly because the curriculum had been affected by ideology and
partly because the regime emphasised physical fitness rather than
intellectual success. Evidence suggests that discipline in schools
declined. Nazi youth organisations did provide children with expanded
opportunities to participate in sport and social activities and travel in
the German countryside, and the organisations were popular.
However, the increasingly compulsory and regimented nature of Nazi
youth organisations alienated some who had initially been attracted to
the Nazis when they had represented a rebellion against established
values. Some young people were actively involved in groups that
rejected Nazism, most notably the Edelweiss Pirates.
Nazi cultural policies
Hitler was an enthusiast for certain types of art and architecture but
saw culture as a means to promote Nazi ideas. Under the Nazis,
modern art was denounced as degenerate and artistic endeavours
were encouraged that promoted Nazi racial ideals. Books by Jewish
authors or those considered to promote communist, liberal or other
non-Nazi ideas were often banned or even burned, as in Berlin in May
1933. The artistic developments of the Weimar era were denounced.
Hitler encouraged the development of grand schemes of classical
architecture, such as those designed by Albert Speer. Architecture
was supposed to embody the strength and the triumph of the Nazi
movement.

How far did were children in Germany subject to indoctrination
between 1933 and 1945?
Children in Nazi Germany were subject to indoctrination to a

significant extent. This occurred at school and in propaganda
directed at children by the Nazi regime through youth organisations,
such as the Hitler Youth and the BDM. At school, the curriculum
was altered to reflect Nazi ideas and to influence children. In
biology, for example, Nazi racial ideas and Nazi ideas about the role
and position of men and women were taught. In the Hitler Youth,
membership of which became compulsory in 1939, boys were
taught militaristic values, while girls in the BDM were trained in the
role as homemakers. In these ways,
___________________________
___________________________
Establish criteria
criteria based on the key term which you can use to reach and justify
a judgement.
How accurate is it to say that the lives of children in Germany
changed completely between the years 1919 and 1945?
Definition:
___________________________
___________________________
Criteria:
___________________________
___________________________
___________________________
Nazi economic policies, 1933–39
The German economy in 1933
Germany’s economy was still in serious trouble when the Nazis took
over: the economy had shrunk by around 40 per cent, and it is
estimated that 8 million people were unemployed.
Schacht, Mefo bills and the New Plan
Banker Hjalmar Schacht was the dominant figure in Nazi economic
policy 1933–36. His policies built upon work started during the von
Papen and von Schleicher governments, and Schacht focused upon
job creation and stimulating economic growth through use of
government policies and expenditure.
• Public investment tripled and government spending increased by 70
per cent between 1933 and 1936.
• The Reich Labour Service employed 19–25-year-olds.
• Public works schemes saw the construction of autobahns, houses
and public buildings.
• Armaments schemes also provided employment, as did agricultural
schemes such as land reclamation projects.
These measures were paid for partly from taxation, but Schacht also
designed the Mefo bills scheme to finance government spending.
Mefo bills were essentially government IOUs which could be used to
pay for spending and then exchanged within five years for real money.
Mefo bills earned 4 per cent interest every year.
In his economic plan, the New Plan (September 1934), Schacht also
tried to encourage German trade by establishing trading agreements
with other countries such as Romania.
The results of all these policies were quite successful: unemployment
fell and production increased by around 90 per cent between 1932
and 1936, but one problem that Schacht had not managed to solve
was balance of payments – Germany imported more than it exported,
leaving it short of foreign currency.
Goering, Wehrwirtschaft and the Four Year
Plan
Despite Schacht’s success, by 1936 he was falling out of favour with
Hitler. With unemployment reduced and the economy growing once
more, Hitler wished to focus policies upon his main concern of building
a fearsome military machine. Hitler now wanted the economy to
become one geared up for a major war, a Wehrwirtschaft. Schacht
wished to focus economic policy more on developing exports to
address the balance of payments problem. In August 1936, Hitler
resolved this disagreement by giving Hermann Goering sweeping
powers over the economy as Plenipotentiary of the Four Year Plan.
Hitler wanted Germany to be ready to fight a major war within four
years and Goering was prepared to enact policies to achieve this.
The Four Year Plan, 1936

• In order to fight a large war, it was felt that Germany needed to be
autarkic, or economically self-sufficient. Therefore, the plan
involved increased production in agriculture and raw materials and
the production of ersatz (substitute) materials, such as artificial
rubber, to replace imports. These were not always of good quality.
• Massive expansion of armaments was planned – a huge industrial
enterprise, Reichswerke Hermann Goering (RWHG), was
established in Salzgitter to develop armaments production.
The Four Year Plan was partially successful. Massive rearmament
occurred and in some areas (for example, explosives) huge expansion
was achieved, but autarky was not attained. By 1939, a third of raw
materials were still imports, and targets were not achieved.
Living standards 1933–39
Farmers
By 1933, agriculture in Germany had been in depression for a number
of years. In addition to the work of the Reich Food Estate, which
regulated agricultural production and consumption, measures were
also taken to protect small- and medium-sized farms. Grants were
provided for improvements to farms, debt repayments reduced, and
tariffs on imported food were increased. Initially, these measures
improved the standard of living of German farmers, whose incomes
increased by 41 per cent between 1933 and 1936. Agricultural wages
still lagged behind urban wages, however, and from 1937 farm
incomes stagnated again. A labour shortage severely hit farms and
the industry struggled with rising labour costs.
Workers
The effect of Nazi policies on the standard of living for workers was
mixed. Job creation schemes helped to reduce unemployment and
some of the Nazis’ benefit programmes improved working families’
standards of living, but incomes in real terms declined and working
hours increased. Some Nazi social policies also improved the
standard of living for certain groups of people. Non-Jewish pregnant
women were given free health care and by 1938, 2.5 million families
enjoyed increased benefits for larger families.
Simple essay style

Choose four general points, and provide three pieces of specific
information to support each general point.
How far do you agree that Nazi economic policies in the years
1933–39 brought few significant benefits to the German people?
importance of these general points to the question posed.
Write numbers on the spectrum below to indicate their relative
importance. Having done this, write a brief justification of your
placement, explaining why some of these factors are more important
than others. The resulting diagram could form the basis of part of an
essay plan for a section of the essay that focuses on the period
1933–39.
How far do you agree that economic policies in Germany were
effective between 1933 and 1945?
1 Agricultural incomes increased in 1933–37 but stagnated after

1937
2 Production in Germany almost doubled in the early years of Nazi
rule
3 Unemployment reduced dramatically in the early years of Nazi rule
4 The Nazis struggled to achieve autarky
5 Ersatz materials were sometimes of poor quality
Government in wartime
During the war, the chaotic tendencies of Nazi government increased
as Hitler withdrew even further from direct control of much of the
government. The most ideological part of the regime, the SS, became
increasingly powerful and radical during the war.
Governmental anarchy
The structure of government continued to lack clear decision-making
procedure and lines of accountability, and contained complex and
overlapping structures. The economic requirements of the war created
a new layer of complexity, as bodies such as the Todt organisation
and the SS pursued their own economic agendas. Factionalism grew
as ministries, the party and other organisations, such as the army and
the SS, vied for power.
The role of Hitler
Hitler was primarily focused upon military matters during the war, and
did not generally concern himself with other areas of government. His
secretary Martin Bormann often acted to deny other people’s access
to Hitler. Himmler did visit Hitler to discuss the Holocaust, however.
Hitler considered himself a military expert, but his interference in
areas such as the war with the Soviet Union were not generally
constructive. He also trusted Goering’s decision-making, for example
in relation to the Battle of Britain and supply lines on the Eastern
Front. However, Goering’s judgements on these issues turned out to
be flawed.
As the war continued, the high rate of casualties on the Eastern Front
damaged morale and provoked criticism of Hitler, who was by this
point rarely seen in public – from 1943 Goebbels was much more the
public face of the regime. Following the German defeat at Stalingrad,
Goebbels gave and then publicised a speech at the Sportpalast arena
in Berlin, calling for all Germans to support an effort for ‘total war’. It
was also Goebbels who orchestrated the response to the 1944 Bomb
Plot, and who arranged rapidly for Hitler to give a speech on the radio,
demonstrating that he had survived and was not badly injured.
The role of the SS
The lawlessness of the Third Reich increased during the war. The SS
were entrusted with running Nazi-occupied territories in Eastern
Europe, and instituted brutal and exploitative policies in these areas.
By 1944, the organisation’s army, the Waffen SS (which was separate
from the rest of the German army, the Wehrmacht), contained
900,000 people responsible for the most extreme aspects of Nazi
policy – the mass killings of European Jews and the system of death
camps.

the judgement.
How accurate is it to say that government in Germany was
characterised by chaos between the years 1933 and 1945?
Government in Germany was strongly chaotic during the Second

World War.
___________________________
___________________________
Government in Germany could not be said to be wholly chaotic

during the Second World War.
___________________________
___________________________
Tip: whichever option you choose, you will have to weigh up both
Develop the detail
How far do you agree that Hitler was a weak dictator in the years
1933–45?
During the Second World War, in many ways Hitler appeared to be

a weak dictator, as he withdrew further from decisions. The chaos of
the Nazi state actually increased during the war, and Goebbels was
often the more public face of the regime. Powerful individuals
sometimes struggled to meet with Hitler and decision-making
remained chaotic. However, during this period Hitler did take a
strong interest in military decisions, and in these areas could not be
said to be a weak dictator. Furthermore, those who exercised great
power, such as Goering, Goebbels and Himmler, only did so on
Hitler’s authority. As during the 1930s, during the war Hitler
continued to intervene more directly and show his powers in areas
that he thought were most important, such as military matters.
The war economy
The German economy, 1939–41
Early on in the war, Hitler sought to dramatically expand the German
war economy. Between 1939 and 1941, German military expenditure
doubled. By 1941, 55 per cent of the workforce was involved in
projects related to the war. Despite these efforts, German productivity
was disappointing and below that of its enemies. Britain produced
twice as many aircraft as Germany in 1941 and the USSR produced
2,600 more tanks. The chaotic organisation of the Nazi state hindered
economic efficiency, as the various bodies responsible did not co-
ordinate effectively. During the war, the Office of the Four Year Plan,
various parts of the SS, the Ministry of Economics, the Ministry of
Armaments and the armed forces all had responsibility for armaments
production, while at a local level, the powerful Gauleiters often
interfered with economic plans.
The appointment of Speer, 1942
To try to resolve these difficulties, Fritz Todt, Head of the Ministry of
Armaments, simplified the production of armaments in January 1942.
Industry was now directed to increase productivity. Hitler sought to
further improve matters by appointing his trusted confidant Albert
Speer as Minister of Munitions in February 1942, following Todt’s
death. In September 1943, Speer’s powers were extended when he
was given responsibility for all industry and raw materials as Minister
for Armaments and Production. Speer took a number of actions,
including:
• developing the work of Todt in establishing a Central Planning
Board to coordinate economic organisation while also giving
industry more freedom to develop
• trying to exclude the military from economic planning
• encouraging the employment of women
• using concentration camp prisoners as labour
• preventing the conscription of skilled workers
• deploying production lines
• encouraging the standardisation of armaments and establishing an
Armaments Commission to oversee this.
Speer had considerable success as ammunition production rose by 97
per cent, tank production rose by 25 per cent and total arms
production by 59 per cent. Between 1942 and 1944 German war
production trebled. Raw materials were also used more efficiently and
productivity per munitions worker increased by 60 per cent.
The failures of the war economy
Although German production levels increased, Germany was still out-
produced by the USA and, crucially, by the Soviet Union. In the end,
despite the improvements in efficiency that Speer had put in place, the
war economy contributed to Germany’s defeat. There are a number of
reasons for this.
• The state remained chaotic, with some Gauleiter and the SS often
acting against economic efficiency.
• Labour shortages held the economy back.
• Unlike in the Soviet Union, Britain and the US, women were not fully
mobilised in the war effort.
• There was a heavy reliance on foreign workers (of whom there were
6.4 million by 1942). These were often little more than badly treated
and underfed slave labourers: as a result their productivity was 60–
80 per cent lower than that of the average German worker.
• Shortages of raw materials such as coal and oil held the German
economy back – the production of ersatz materials did not fully
compensate for this.
• The Germans needed the raw materials of the countries that they
conquered in order to fight a major war, but the destructive manner
of their conquest was not conducive to the effective exploitation of
these resources.
• Supply of some materials such as iron ore and magnesium did
improve as other countries were overrun but in the Soviet Union,
Stalin’s scorched earth policy of destroying infrastructure and useful
supplies hindered the Nazis – in the Donbass region of the Ukraine
in 1942, the output of coal mines was only 5 per cent of its pre-war
levels.
• Allied bombing reduced the capacity of the German economy to
expand further – industry was targeted and the Germans had to
divert crucial resources towards defensive measures.

To what extent did German economic policy fulfil its aims
During the Second World War, German productivity was

disappointing and below that of their enemies. Britain produced
twice as many aircraft as Germany in 1941 and the USSR produced
2,600 more tanks. This meant that
___________________________
___________________________
Under the leadership of Albert Speer from 1942, ammunition

production in Germany rose by 97 per cent, tank production rose by
25 per cent and total arms production by 59 per cent, which helped
German war aims in that
___________________________
___________________________
The production of ersatz materials did not compensate for

shortages of raw materials during the Second World War. This was
a problem for economic policy because
___________________________
___________________________
The destructive policies followed by Nazi invaders in Eastern

Europe hindered economic policy aims in that
___________________________
___________________________
Develop the detail
detail. Annotate the paragraph to add detail to the answer.
To what extent did German economic policy fulfil its aims
During the Second World War, the Nazis only achieved their
economic aims to a limited extent. Production levels remained
disappointing in Germany and at a lower level than that of their
enemies. Albert Speer did have some success from 1942 at
improving this situation, but it was not sufficient to gain an
advantage against, for example, the Soviet Union. One issue was
that the labour was not always productive: the Nazis relied on
forced foreign workers, who were less efficient, and they did not
mobilise women in the workforce to the same extent as the Soviets.
Furthermore, the Nazis did not manage to avoid shortages of
materials during the Second World War, despite invading many
other countries possessing raw materials.
The domestic impact of the war
The impact of the war on ordinary Germans was profound, although
the problems with shortages were not as bad as those seen during the
First World War. The war affected different social groups in different
ways.
The impact on workers
• In order to try to maximise the productivity of German workers,
wages were reduced and bonuses and extra overtime payments
were banned at the start of the war. This strategy backfired,
however, as there was then a higher level of absenteeism.
Consequently, by October 1939, wage levels were restored.
• The regime also now sought to improve its mobilisation of labour by
transferring workers in non-essential work to war work and by
creating a register of men and women of working age.
• As the war dragged on into 1944, the impact on German workers
became severe, as holidays were banned and the working week
was increased to 60 hours per week. Workers were in a weak
position to resist these new pressures.
• Workers were also kept in line via the system of organising them
into groups overseen by a loyal party member.
The impact on women
• Married women with young children were often left alone to manage
food and fuel shortages and look after the home as men were
conscripted.
• Nazi ideology emphasised the role of women as mothers and
homemakers and thus the regime was left with a dilemma when
there were labour shortages. Hitler refused to authorise the mass
conscription of women, however, and even though the power to
conscript women existed, it was not much used.
• Women did not voluntarily join the workforce in large numbers as
families of conscripted men received reasonable benefits. The
numbers of women employed in industry actually decreased
• The demands of total war required an adjustment in Nazi policy
towards women. From January 1943, all women between 17 and 45
were required to register to work, although there were exemptions
for pregnant women, those with two or more children and the wives
of farmers, who were seen as essential to maintaining agricultural
production. Necessity had forced Hitler to modify, though not entirely
abandon, his policies towards women.
• In the later stages of the war, Hitler was persuaded to increase the
upper age limit of women compelled to work to 50 and there was a
significant increase in the number of women workers. By 1945, 60
per cent of workers were women and women undertook some
military duties, such as anti-aircraft operations.
Women workers
Nazi ideology and policy had encouraged women to stay at home
and raise children. Despite this, 52 per cent of German women
worked at the time of the outbreak of war. The combination of the
failure to actually conscript women or organise a campaign to
increase their participation, combined with the already fairly high
level of female employment, meant that increasing the labour supply
via the use of women workers did not really occur.
Mind map
Use the information on the opposite page to add details to the mind
map below.
selection.
How far did the position of women in Germany change 1933–
45?
The position of women in Germany during the Second World War

changed to a small/some/a substantial extent. Women’s role as
homemakers and mothers was to a large extent maintained, and
because of his ideology, Hitler refused to authorise the mass
conscription of women. Even though the power to conscript women
existed, it was not much used. Furthermore, women did not
voluntarily join the workforce in large numbers as families of
conscripted men received reasonable benefits, and the numbers of
women employed in industry actually decreased between 1939 and
1941. During wartime many women did experience a change to
their role, however, as they were left without their husbands and
had to become the head of the household. In addition, eventually,
more women did get involved in the workforce, as the demands of
total war required an adjustment in Nazi policy towards women, and
from January 1943 all women between 17 and 45 were required to
register to work, although there were exemptions. By 1945, 60 per
cent of workers were women and women undertook some military
duties such as anti-aircraft operations. Overall, during the Second
World War, the position of women in Germany changed
slightly/moderately/entirely
___________________________
___________________________
The ‘Final Solution’ and the Holocaust
Nazi persecution during the Second World
War – timeline
Year Persecution affecting Jews Persecution
affecting other
groups
1939 September 1939 – the invasion of German Roma sent
Poland and the start of the Second to concentration
World War; ghettos for Polish Jews camps in Poland and
established Germany
October – German Jews placed under October – the
curfew ‘euthanasia’
programme against
disabled children
starts
1940 The Madagascar Plan drawn up – a A group of Roma
plan to move 4 million European Jews children were
to live in Madagascar, an idea gassed in
eventually abandoned as impractical Buchenwald
concentration camp
Start of the murder
of 70,000 mentally ill
people
1941 All Jews forced to wear the Star of
David
June – following the invasion of the
Soviet Union, Einsatzgruppen and
their local supporters carried out
systematic massacres of Jews
1942 January – The Wannsee Conference:
representatives of various party and
state organisation agreed to the ‘Final
Solution’
Spring – death camps established at
Auschwitz, Sobibor and Treblinka
1943– Transportation of Jews from all over
44 Europe to death camps
The role of Hitler
Hitler’s speeches and writings showed that anti-Semitism was
fundamental to his world-view. His ideas were the inspiration behind
the ever-escalating anti-Semitism of his regime. It is also
inconceivable that Hitler did not agree to the policy of the ‘Final
Solution’ and indeed a diary entry of Himmler’s indicates that at a
meeting to discuss the ‘final solution of the Jewish question’ in
December 1941, Hitler authorised or ordered that Jews should be
‘exterminated as partisans’. Most historians do not believe that Hitler
had a clear plan for the ‘Final Solution’ that pre-dated the war,
however.
Cumulative radicalisation and the chaotic
state
Another part of the explanation for the ‘Final Solution’ is that it was a
consequence of the process of ever-growing extremism that occurred
in the Third Reich as a result of the chaotic decision-making
procedures. The chaos encouraged local initiatives and ideological
radicalism. Cumulative radicalisation led to escalating action –
German Jews were subject to restrictions and repression at the start
of the war, but were not confined to ghettos. Polish Jews were then
subject to the same measures and ordered into overcrowded ghettos
run by the SS. When Germany invaded the Soviet Union,
Einsatzgruppen, following the army to ensure SS control, had wide-
ranging instructions to eliminate opponents, and massacres of Jews
followed. These became systematic as the army moved eastwards
and culminated in a policy of organised genocide in the death camp
system.
The impact of the war
The ‘Final Solution’ developed in the context of war.
• The German invasion of Poland had created what the Nazis
regarded as a problem. The Jewish population of Poland was large,
at around 3 million. Jews were forced into ghettos, which were
overcrowded and insanitary. When Jews from other parts of Europe
started to be deported to the ghettos the problem intensified.
• Fighting, particularly on the Eastern Front, was brutal and
dehumanising and made it easier to consider extreme action.
• When invading areas of the Soviet Union, Einsatzgruppen carried
out the first systematic massacres of the Holocaust. When the ‘Final
Solution’ was planned, mass killings of Jews and some other groups
such as Roma were already occurring in the USSR.
• As the invasion of the Soviet Union put strains on the German war
economy, the cost of feeding people in ghettos was considered too
great.
• With the failure of the Madagascar Plan and the success of small-
scale experiments with murder by gas, the plan for the ‘Final
Solution’ was drawn up and executed – the systematic
transportation to death camps of the entire Jewish population of
Europe.

How far do you agree that Nazi racial policy became ever more
extreme between the years 1933 and 1945?
In general, Nazi racial policy became ever more extreme during the
time they were in power, and this was particularly true during the
Second World War. The invasion of Poland saw the creation of
ghettos in that country, and intensification of anti-Semitic measures.
The Nazis deported other Jewish populations to their ghettos when
they invaded further territories, which caused a deterioration of
conditions in the ghettos. Furthermore, during the invasion of the
Soviet Union from June 1941, Nazi killing squads, assisted by local
collaborators, systematically murdered Jewish and Roma
populations in these areas. Mobile gas chambers (which had
previously been used by the Nazis to murder some disabled people)
were then deployed, before the plan began to be enacted from late
1942 to establish death camps and transport remaining European
Jews and Roma to these camps. During the Second World War,
Nazi racial policies became more radical and
___________________________
___________________________
Recommended reading
Below is a list of suggested further reading on the topic of the
Holocaust.
• David Cesarani, The Final Solution – The Fate of the Jews 1933–
49 (2016), pages 451–580
• Nikolaus Wachsmann, KL – A History of the Nazi Concentration
Camps (2015)
Exam focus
Below is a Level 5 answer to an A-level exam-style question. Read it
and the comments around it.
How far do you agree that the Nazi regime relied mainly upon
popular support for its power 1933–45?
The Nazi regime relied to some extent upon popular support for its
power between 1933 and 1945, but I do not agree that it relied
mainly upon this. The Nazis also relied to a significant extent upon
the use of terror and the suspension of civil rights to maintain their
power.
To some extent, the Nazi regime depended upon popular support to
keep power between 1933 and 1945. They had come to power as
the most popular political party in Germany, having won the largest
vote share in the July and November 1932 elections at which they
gained 37 per cent and 32 per cent of the vote. In the March 1933
election, after they had taken power, the party increased their vote
share to 44 per cent. The party had also become a popular mass
movement by 1933, with a large membership, a network of
membership organisations such as the Hitler Youth, and mass rallies.
It is very unlikely that the Nazis would have come into power in the
first place without the popularity that they had. Furthermore, the party
continued to believe, at least in the 1930s, that it was important to be
seen to win popular votes. In a series of plebiscites held throughout
the 1930s, the German people voted (or appeared to vote) in favour
of Nazi policies, such as the remilitarisation of the Rhineland. These
votes show that the Nazi Party wished to continue to demonstrate
that it had popular support for its actions.
Specific evidence is used to support the point.
The Nazi Party also showed that their power relied upon popular
support through their extensive use of propaganda. The Nazis used
modern propaganda methods in their elections campaigns before
they came to power, for example during the ‘Hitler over Germany’
campaign of 1932 during the presidential elections. They continued
to rely upon these methods once in power, which indicates that the
party placed great emphasis upon the value of popular support. In
power, Goebbels became head of a Ministry for Popular
Enlightenment and Propaganda and great efforts were put into
publicising Nazi policies in a positive way, into promoting Nazi ideas
and into promoting the idea of Hitler as the saviour of Germany.
During the Second World War, Goebbels continued to focus on
propaganda to try and maintain morale, for example, during his ‘total
war’ speech. These propaganda efforts, along with some successes
in foreign and economic policy, may have helped to increase support
for the Nazi regime. Support for Hitler was widespread and evidence
suggests that people were supportive of some of the foreign policy
successes, such as rearmament and remilitarisation of the
Rhineland. In addition, some ordinary people sometimes benefitted
from Nazi policies, such as full employment policies and family
benefits. All of these policies show that the Nazis sought popular
support, and at least to some extent relied upon it.
However, the Nazis did not rely mainly on popular support for their
power as they also relied to a significant extent upon terror. In the
initial period after they came to power, the Nazis attempted to
eliminate their main opponents. After the Reichstag Fire, civil rights
were suspended and people could be arrested for any reason or
none. Around 100,000 people, mainly socialists, communists and
trade unionists, were put into concentration camps at this time –
Dachau, the first of these camps, was opened in March 1933.
Hundreds of newspapers were closed down. In May 1933 the entire
trade union movement of Germany was shut down and replaced by a
Nazi organisation, and in July all other political parties were banned.
The courts were used to try people accused of treason, which
essentially meant opposing the Nazi Party. Those who did not fit into
the Nazis’ ‘Volksgemeinschaft ’ were isolated and oppressed in
Germany. The Jewish community, for example, saw their rights
eroded in the Nuremberg Laws in 1935, had property forcibly
removed and suffered violence and terror during Kristallnacht in
1938. During the Second World War, opponents to the regime often
faced even harsher penalties, as can be seen in the execution of the
members of the White Rose movement in 1944. At this time the
Nazis increased their persecution of their enemies, up to and
including mass murder and genocide. Overall, the Nazis were able to
maintain power partly through weakening or destroying their
opponents, isolating and ultimately trying to destroy those who did
not fit into their racial ideal, and through creating widespread fear
and intimidation.
The candidate returns at the end of the paragraph to make their

argument.
In conclusion, the Nazi regime relied upon popular support to an

extent to maintain their power, but also to a significant extent on
terror and intimidation. People were not free to protest or oppose the
regime, and faced very harsh penalties if they attempted to resist.
However, the regime clearly felt that popular support was important
for maintaining their power, and put great efforts into propaganda. In
addition, some of their policies were popular, and they did enjoy
significant popular support. Overall, it was a mixed strategy of
propaganda and terror.
A clear answer to the question.
This is a high-level response as the candidate gives a

clear but balanced answer to the question. There is a
great deal of supporting evidence deployed and a clear
conclusion that explains the argument being given.
Find the evidence

The most important element in producing an argument is supporting
evidence and examples. Read the essay again and identify where
evidence has been used effectively to support a point.
AS-level questions
Was the Night of the Long Knives the main reason for the growth
of Nazi power within government in the years 1933–39? Explain
your answer.
To what extent were there changes in the role of women in the

years 1919–45?
3 Historical interpretations: How far was
Hitler’s foreign policy responsible for the
Second World War?
The influence of German history on Nazi

foreign policy
The historical debate
In many ways, the causes of the Second World War can seem
simple: Hitler’s ideology and aggression led the world to a conflict of
appalling destructiveness. However, most historians argue that there
were other causes of the Second World War. In order to understand
them, it is necessary to consider:
• the influence of German history on Nazi foreign policy
• Hitler’s ideas and his role in the shaping of Nazi foreign policy
• the reasons for the German invasion of Poland in 1939
• the contribution of other nations to the outbreak of war.
The influence of German history
Some historians have argued that Germany’s modern development
had followed a special path (in German, Sonderweg) that caused the
country to be more militaristic and aggressive than other developed
nations. Historians who hold this view point to the authoritarianism
and militarism of German culture, the fact that the Second Reich was
created after a series of military conflicts and the influence of the
militaristic traditions of the Prussian Army on German culture.
According to this argument, these are the long-term causes of the
war.
Nazi policy and German history

There are undoubtedly some ways in which Nazi foreign policy
reflected previous German policy or attitudes.
• The ‘September Program’, drawn up by the German government
at the start of the First World War, set out Germany’s ambition to
take over vast areas of Europe.
• In some respects, Kaiser Wilhelm II’s Weltpolitik scheme of
colonial expansion, prior to 1914, might also be regarded as a kind
of forerunner of Hitler’s ambitions. Moreover, Weltpolitik was based
on racist assumptions.
• The idea that the German people needed territorial Lebensraum,
‘living space’, to expand into, had grown in popularity in Germany
in the late nineteenth century. Indeed, the desire to conquer
territory in Eastern Europe and Russian was popular prior to 1914.
• Anti-Semitism, and other kinds of racism, had a long history in
Germany, and in the late nineteenth century, pseudo-scientific
ideas about ‘racial purity’ were common.
• The idea that all German peoples should be united in one country
was also held by some pre-war Germany and some German-
speakers in the Austro-Hungarian Empire.
Critics of this this view

Even though there were similarities between Nazi policies and some
earlier policies and ideas, there are many historians who reject the
notion that Germany had a Sonderweg. Critics argue that most other
major European countries were imperialist and racist in the
nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, and yet this did not lead
them to prepare for a major European war during the 1930s.
Franco–German tensions and the Treaty of

Versailles
Some historians have argued that long-term relations between
France and Germany led to the outbreak of the Second World War.
The Second Reich was formed in the aftermath of the defeat of
France in the Franco–Prussian War of 1870–71. At the end of this
conflict, the new German Reich took over the French regions of
Alsace-Lorraine. French resentment about German aggression and
suspicions about German actions continued throughout the period
1871–1914. After the end of the First World War, the French were
determined to get their territory back and also to ensure that
Germany would never humiliate France again.
Conclusions: German history and Nazi foreign

policy
Most historians would accept that the ideas of right-wing German
and Austrian nationalists, such as the unity of all Germans and
Lebensraum, did influence Nazi ideas. However, how far these
issues were the main cause of the Second World War is disputed.
Contrasting interpretations
Below are sample Section C exam questions and the
accompanying extracts. The extracts offer different interpretations
of the issue raised by the question. Identify the interpretation
offered in each extract and complete the table below, indicating how
far the extracts agree with each other, and explaining your answer.
Extent of agreement Justification
Extracts 1 and 2
In the light of differing interpretations, how convincing do you

find the view that ‘Hitler’s restless quest for empire’ led to the
outbreak of the Second World War?
To explain your answer, analyse and evaluate the material in

both extracts, using your own knowledge of the issues.
Study Extracts 1 and 2. Historians have different views about

how far Hitler’s foreign policy was responsible for the Second
World War. Analyse and evaluate the extracts and use your
knowledge of the issues to explain your answer to the following
question. How far do you agree with the view that it was Hitler’s
aggressive foreign policy which led to the outbreak of war in
1939?
EXTRACT 1
From Richard Overy, The Origins of the Second World War,
published 2016.
The Second World War once seemed a simple event to explain. If it
did not exactly boil down to one word – ‘Hitler’ – the war was
nevertheless the Germans’ war. Without Hitler’s restless quest for
empire, war might have been avoided.
In practice, the outbreak of war was a great deal more complicated
than this. Historians cannot even agree on the pressures that
pushed Hitler towards war. While some see a clear intention in his
part to launch wars of aggression based on the ideas of racial
struggle and world empire, others emphasise the importance of fear
of domestic unrest and economic crisis brought about by the
excessive cost of rearmament.
Arguments such as these mask a more important problem in
explaining the outbreak of war. By concentrating on Germany we
are in danger of forgetting that Germany was part, and quite a small
part, of a global international structure. German statesmen reacted
to problems over which, in many cases, they had no control.
EXTRACT 2
From David Olusoga and Casper W. Erichsen, The Kaiser’s
Holocaust: Germany’s Forgotten Genocide, published 2010.
Nazism as a political ideology emerged, halfformed and half-baked,
from the primordial Volkisch soup of the Munich beer halls. In this
early stage – between 1919 and 1923 – what is most striking about
Nazism as an ideology was its unoriginality. Nazism’s roots in
Volkisch mysticism and nationalist politics of the Second Reich
have encouraged some historians to look for a single figure from
whom Hitler might have derived political inspiration. The fact is that
Nazism was not so much invented as reassembled from the
enormous array of traditional nationalist obsessions and the racial
pseudo-sciences that had mushroomed in the last decades of the
nineteenth century. The acute fear of encirclement by other
European powers, a determined belief that Germany was
chronically overcrowded and an unshakable suspicion that the
nation was being denied her rightful place in the world – these were
all concerns that exercised the Kaiser and his clique as much as
the future Fuhrer and his party. The prejudices and neuroses of the
Second Reich were passed down to Hitler and the Nazis like family
silver.
Hitler’s role in shaping foreign policy
Many historians argue that Hitler’s actions and ideas were a major
cause of the Second World War. Hitler sought Lebensraum and
wanted to overturn the Treaty of Versailles. In order to achieve this
he expanded the Germany military, and annexed Austria and the
whole of Czechoslovakia prior to the invasion of Poland. His vision
was of a huge, ‘racially pure’ German state at the heart of Europe,
supported by satellite states whose populations were enslaved.
Hitler was personally instrumental in pushing foreign and economic
policy in a more aggressive direction that made war more likely. For
example, it was Hitler’s decision to redirect economic policy from
1936 towards preparing for a large-scale war (see page 54).
Additionally, in 1936 he went ahead with the remilitarisation of the
Rhineland, breaching the Treaty of Versailles, against the advice of
his generals.
In 1938, Hitler and Goering were behind the decision to push forward
with the annexation of Austria. Hitler also steered his military
generals towards preparation for a major European war from 1938,
and purged any generals who opposed him during the Blomberg-
Fritsch Affair. Hitler was central to events in Czechoslovakia in
1938 and 1939, as well as the decision to invade Poland in 1939,
which, unlike much of his previous foreign policy decisions, was not
initially popular with German people.
Master planner or opportunist?
Historians disagree on the extent to which Hitler had a plan for war,
or how far the path to war was the result of Hitler seizing
opportunities.
Masterplan?
There is some evidence that Hitler had a plan for world domination.
Hitler set out his foreign policy aims in many speeches and
documents.
• The Nazi 25 Points programme published in 1920, demanded the
abolition of the Treaty of Versailles and land for Germany to
colonise.
• Mein Kampf set out Hitler’s vision to create Lebensraum in Eastern
Europe.
• Hitler’s Second Book, written in 1928 and published after his
death, set out his Stufenplan, a stage-by-stage programme which
aimed to make Germany the world’s dominant power.
• The Four Year Plan was introduced in 1936 in order to get
Germany ready for war in the early 1940s.
• The Hossbach Memorandum, a record of Hitler’s discussion with
senior generals which took place in 1937, set out Hitler’s vision for
Anschluss and the destruction of Czechoslovakia by 1945.
It is clear that Hitler’s writings and his goals influenced Nazi policy.
However, while Hitler’s aims were clear, some historians argue that
his writings do not constitute a fully worked out plan. Moreover, Hitler
never wrote of starting a world war in 1939.
Opportunist?
Other historians argue that Hitler tended to improvise, making the
most of opportunities as they arose. For example, Hitler was unsure
how Britain and France would respond to the remilitarisation of the
Rhineland, but after they accepted it, Hitler’s foreign policy became
bolder.
Plan for peace?
Some historians argue that throughout the 1930s Hitler’s main goal
was to avoid war. From this point of view, Hitler’s attempt to find
excuses to justify expansion into Czechoslovakia and Poland, and
his willingness to sign treaties with Britain and France and the
USSR, can all be viewed as evidence that Hitler was keen to expand
without starting a major war.
RAG – rate the interpretation

Below are a sample exam question and one of the extracts referred
to in the question. Read the question, study the extract and, using
three coloured pens, underline it in red, amber or green to show:
• Red: counter-arguments and counter-evidence provided by the
extract
• Amber: evidence that supports this interpretation
• Green: the interpretation offered by the extract.
find the view that Hitler’s opportunism led to the outbreak of the
Second World War?
EXTRACT 1
From A. J. P. Taylor, The Origins of the Second World War.
As it was, he became involved in the world of action; and here, I
think, he exploited events far more than he followed coherent plans.
He did not so much aim for war as expect it to happen. Hitler
certainly directed his generals to prepare for war. But so did the
British, and for that matter every other government. By ‘plan’ I
understand something which is prepared and worked out in detail.
In my sense Hitler never had a plan for Lebensraum. There was no
study of the resources in the territories that were to be conquered;
no definition even of what these territories were to be. There was
no recruitment of a staff to carry out these ‘plans’, no survey of
Germans who could be moved, let alone any enrolment. When
large parts of Soviet Russia were conquered, the administrators of
the conquered territories found themselves running round in circles,
unable to get any directive whether they were to exterminate the
existing populations or to exploit them, whether to treat them as
friends or enemies. The abstract speculator turned out to be also a
statesman on the make who did not consider beforehand what he
would make or how. He got as far as he did because others did not
know what to do with him. As supreme ruler of Germany, Hitler
bears the greatest responsibility for acts of immeasurable evil: for
the destruction of German democracy; for the concentration camps;
and worse of all, for the extermination of peoples. His foreign policy
was different.
Add your own knowledge

Using the extract from the last activity, write around the edge of the
extract any relevant knowledge of your own that would help you
answer the question.
Tips:
• You can add your own knowledge that supports and challenges
the extract.
• You can also add new alternative arguments that challenge the
interpretation offered by the extract.
The contribution of other nations to the
outbreak of the war
While there is no doubt that Hitler and Germany played an important
role in starting the Second World War, other nations also played a
role. Indeed, Hitler had the opportunity and confidence to ignore the
Treaty of Versailles and launch aggressive actions because the
weakness of the international system. During the 1930s:
• the USA and the USSR largely stayed out of foreign affairs
• Britain and France were not in a strong position to try to uphold
international order, as they both had economic problems after the
Depression, and France was very unstable politically
• the League of Nations was ineffective; the League was supposed
to work for peace, but lacked the unity and power to take decisive
action over aggression. For example, it was unable to stop Italy’s
invasion of Abyssinia in 1936
• the events of the Spanish Civil War (1936–39), which was won by
the nationalists and fascists, strengthened Germany’s international
position. It led to greater unity between Italy and Germany. At the
same time, Britain and France maintained a position of neutrality
during the civil war, which created the impression that they would
not intervene to stop military aggression.
Appeasement
‘Appeasement’ is the name given to the British and French policy
towards Germany from 1935 to the invasion of Czechoslovakia in
March 1939. Appeasement means making concessions in order to
avoid war. It often has the negative connotation of weakness and
passivity in the face of aggression.
The causes of appeasement

Britain and France adopted a policy of appeasement for several
reasons.
• Britain and France wanted to avoid war. In the context of the
Depression and the aftermath of the First World War, the British
and French public were keen to avoid another conflict, at least until
1939.
• Many in Britain believed that the Treaty of Versailles had been
excessively harsh, and therefore supported Hitler’s policies to
reverse the terms of the Treaty.
• France experienced a series of political crisis in the 1930s.
Therefore, the French government did not feel strong enough to
take decisive action against Germany without British support.
The consequences of appeasement

From 1935 to 1938, Britain and France were prepared to allow
Germany to breach the terms of the Treaty of Versailles and follow
an ever more aggressive foreign policy.
In pursing the policy of appeasement, Britain and France often
overlooked or even consented to aggressive acts by the Nazi
government. Britain and France took no action to force German
forces to withdraw after the remilitarisation of the Rhineland. Britain
and France did not stop Anschluss. Furthermore, when Hitler
threated Czechoslovakia in 1938, British Prime Minister Neville
Chamberlain preferred to negotiate the Munich Agreement, an
international agreement between Britain, France, Germany and Italy
– which the Czech government had little option but to sign, and
which allowed Germany to take over the Sudeten part of
Czechoslovakia, rather than stand up to Hitler.
Was appeasement misguided?

Chamberlain, in particular, is often criticised for the policy of
appeasement. But appeasement gave the British time to rearm and
prepare to fight Hitler. Between the signing of the Munich
Agreement and the start of the war a year later, Britain developed
radar and expanded its rearmament program. Nevertheless, by
creating the impression that they would not resist German
aggression, appeasement encouraged Hitler to think that his
aggression would succeed.
Lack of unity
Concerted action by the USSR, France and Britain might have
prevented Hitler’s attack on Poland, and therefore prevented the
outbreak of war. However, the three countries could not work
together.
Britain was reluctant to work with the USSR. British leaders did not
want to share information and intelligence with a communist country.
Suspicion of communism made an alliance impossible.
Challenge the historian

Below are a sample Section C exam question and one of the
accompanying extracts. You must read the extract, identify the
interpretation it offers and use your own knowledge to provide a
counter-argument, challenging the extract’s interpretation.
find the view in Extract 1 that ‘actions by other nations could
have minimised the likelihood of the outbreak of war’?
Interpretation offered by the source:

___________________________
___________________________
Counter-argument:
___________________________
___________________________
___________________________
___________________________
EXTRACT 1
From Helen Roche, Interpretation, published 2015.
Was there ever a point at which other nations could realistically
have called a halt to the Third Reich’s expansionism? There did
indeed exist such windows of missed historical opportunity, during
which actions by other nations could have minimised the likelihood
of the outbreak of war.
Foreign reactions to the remilitarisation of the Rhineland were to set
the tone for all future dealings with Hitler; the annexation therefore
constitutes a crucial turning point. The dictator himself apparently
stated that ‘the 48 hours after the march into the Rhineland were
the most nerve-wracking of my life …’ Indeed it would have been
easy for the French army, then the largest in the world, to stop the
German forces in their tracks. However, France insisted upon full
British support. Both Prime Minister Baldwin and Chamberlain then
insisted that the British public would refuse to countenance any risk
of war.
In conclusion: had British and French politicians taken Hitler’s
ambitions more seriously and had Chamberlain not been so
convinced that war with Germany must be prevented it might have
been possible to subdue Germany before she had rearmed
sufficiently to be a truly dangerous threat. Ultimately, however,
foreign weaknesses only served to radicalise the dictator’s resolve.
Why did Germany invade Poland in 1939?
The British, the French and the Polish
Guarantee
Even though the British government sought to avoid war, they were
not prepared to allow Germany to grow too powerful. With this in
mind, following the German takeover of Czechoslovakia, the British
and French government signed the Polish Guarantee in March 1939,
in which they pledged to support Polish independence. French and
British politicians hoped that this would persuade Hitler to stop
German expansion. Indeed, in some ways the Polish Guarantee
marked an end to the policy of appeasement.
Hitler and Poland
Hitler aimed to continue German expansion, while avoiding war with
Britain and France. Crucially, Hitler did not take the Polish Guarantee
seriously. He viewed the British and French governments as weak,
and failed to realise that, after the Munich Agreement, Britain and
France were determined to stop further German expansion. As a
result, Hitler was prepared to ignore the Polish Guarantee and
continue with his plans to invade Poland.
The Nazi–Soviet Pact
In August 1939 the USSR and Germany signed the Nazi–Soviet
Pact. This allowed Poland to be divided between the USSR and the
Germans. The pact meant that Germany could attack Poland without
fear of Soviet opposition.
German invasion
Once the Nazi–Soviet Pact had removed the threat that the USSR
might attack if Germany invaded Poland, Germany authorities faked
an incident on the Polish-German border to provide a pretext for the
invasion. On 1 September 1939, Germany commenced its attack.
Masterplan or miscalculation?
Historians disagree regarding how far the invasion of Poland was
part of Hitler’s masterplan to take Europe to war, or how far it was a
miscalculation.
Many historians have argued that Hitler did not seek a large-scale
conflict in 1939. From this point of view, either he assumed that
Britain and France would back down, or he assumed that any conflict
would be short-lived. Either way, many historians claim that Hitler did
not want a European war.
Hitler’s mistake?
Some historians claim that the policy of appeasement had convinced
Hitler that Britain and France would not act against Germany. In this
sense, they argue, Hitler misjudged the situation.
The British and French declaration of war

On the same day that Germany launched its invasion of Poland, the
British and French ambassadors in Berlin issued an ultimatum,
stating that if German troops did not withdraw from Poland, Britain
and France would declare war against Germany. On the evening of 2
September 1939, Chamberlain told the House of Commons that he
had received no response to his ultimatum, and on 3 September he
announced in a radio broadcast to the public that ‘this country is at
war with Germany’. Within hours, the French government had also
declared war.
Ultimately, Britain and France decided to try and prevent further
Germany aggression and expansionism.
Write the question

The following extracts relate to the causes of the collapse of the
Soviet Union. Having read the previous pages about the Soviet
Union’s collapse, write a Section C exam-style question to
accompany the extracts.
Study Extracts 1 and 2. In the light of differing interpretations,
how convincing do you find the view that
___________________________
___________________________
To explain your answer, analyse and evaluate the material in
both extracts, using your own knowledge of the issues.

question. How far do you agree with the view that
___________________________
___________________________
EXTRACT 1
From Richard Overy with Andrew Wheatcroft, The Road to War,
published 1989.
War was not inevitable in 1939. With Hitler at the helm war at some
time almost certainly was. The problem that the majority of more
moderate German nationalists faced in the 1930s was the difficulty
of creating a domestic political environment that would restrain
Hitler. The brutal methods which had revolutionised Germany in
1933 were institutionalised. As the regime became more confident,
and repression more widespread and effective, the scope for the
radical agenda of racism and war became fuller and more
explosive. But what really permitted Hitler to go further, to
‘accelerate the pace’, was the fundamental weakness of the
international structure into which he burst. The world order
dominated by Britain and France could scarcely cope with colonial
squabbles; a Germany lurching rapidly and unpredictably towards
superpower status was quite beyond control. The radical
nationalists and racists around Hitler could see this; they tied
themselves to Hitler in the hope of profiting from the new German
order. British and French power was swept aside in 1940; Soviet
power was almost destroyed a year later. But the strength of the
United States tipped the scales.
EXTRACT 2
From Richard J. Evans, The Third Reich in Power, 1933–39,
published 2005.
War had been the objective of the Third Reich and its leaders from
the moment they came to power in 1933. From that point up to the
actual outbreak of hostilities in September 1939, they had focused
relentlessly on preparing the nation for a conflict that would bring
European, and eventually world, domination for Germany. The
propaganda image of Hitler as the world statesman who had given
back Germans pride in their country almost single-handedly did not,
of course, entirely correspond to reality. Even in the area of foreign
policy there were occasions, notably the annexation of Austria,
where he had followed the lead of others (in this case Goering), or,
as in the Munich crisis, been forced against his inclination to yield to
international pressure. Others, notably Ribbentrop, had also
wielded considerable influence on the decision-making process at
key moments. Nevertheless, it had indeed been Hitler above all
others who, sometimes encouraged by his immediate entourage,
sometimes not, drove Germany down the road to war between
1933 and 1939. He laid down the broad parameters of policy and
ideology for others to apply in detail. At crucial junctures he took
personal command, often uncertainly and hesitantly at particular
moments of crisis, but always pushing on towards his ultimate goal:
war.
Domestic reasons for the German
invasion of Poland
Economics and public opinion
Some historians claim that the invasion of Poland was brought about
by economic and political pressure in Germany.
The impact of the Four Year Plan

The Four Year Plan, and rearmament more generally, had a negative
impact on the German economy. Some historians argue that this
pushed Germany to war.
• The need for raw materials to make weapons caused a balance of
payments crisis. In 1939, Germany was forced to slow down its
rearmament drive. Hitler believed that a solution to this was to gain
more territory and in so doing take hold of more resources. This
could have been one of Hitler’s motives for eastern expansion,
which in turn led to war.
• Rearmament also had a negative impact on German living
standards. Devoting huge amounts of resources to rearmament
meant that Germany did not have the resources to improve wages,
and it meant that the supply of consumer goods and food became
limited. This economic pressure created discontent. Some
historians argue that Hitler needed to go to war to unite the
country.
Blitzkrieg
Some historians argue that Blitzkrieg provided a solution to Hitler’s
economic and political troubles. According to this view, Hitler was
prepared to launch a Blitzkrieg, a lightning war, with Poland. A quick
war would have the benefit of uniting Germany behind the war effort,
making the government popular after a quick victory, and allowing
Germany to seize Polish resources.
The role of other individuals
Some historians argued that other senior Nazis also had a role in
pushing Germany towards war.
Ribbentrop
Joachim von Ribbentrop was appointed as Foreign Minister by Hitler
in 1938. Ribbentrop replaced Constantin von Neurath, a
conservative who wanted a pragmatic foreign policy. In this sense,
Ribbentrop’s appointment removed an obstacle to the development
of a more aggressive foreign policy. Ribbentrop also played a key
role in negotiating the Nazi–Soviet Pact of August 1939, which led
the way to the invasion of Poland.
Goering
Hermann Goering was responsible for creating and equipping the
Luftwaffe. Moreover, as head of the Four Year Plan Organisation he
was responsible for much of the rearmament of the later 1930s. In
this sense, Goering helped lay the economic and military foundations
for war. In 1938 Goering also advocated an aggressive approach to
Anschluss, which emboldened Hitler’s foreign policy.
Goering also hid the failures of the Four Year Plan and the
weaknesses of the Luftwaffe from Hitler. In so doing he encouraged
Hitler to think that Germany was ready for war. This may well have
persuaded Hitler risk war over Poland in 1939.
The nature of German government
A final domestic reason which might explain was is the nature of
Hitler’s government. Cumulative radicalisation (see page 62) meant
that over time, radical Nazis and radical policies came to dominate
government. In terms of foreign policy this meant that policies
became more aggressive as the 1930s went on.
At the same time, conservatives and pragmatists had no way of
stopping Hitler taking risks, as the checks and balances of the
Weimar Constitution were ignored. This allowed Hitler to pursue an
aggressive foreign policy without any effective opposition within
government.
Linking extracts
Below are a sample Section C question and the two extracts to
which it refers. In one colour, draw links between the extracts to
show ways in which they agree about the reasons for the invasion
of Poland. In another colour, draw links between the sources to
show ways in which they disagree.
Study Extracts 1 and 2. In the light of differing interpretations,
how convincing do you find the view that the German invasion
of Poland came about as a result of Hitler’s exploitation of
events, rather than ‘precise coherent plans’ (Extract 1)?

question. How far do you agree with the view that Hitler’s
ambitions led to the invasion of Poland in 1939?
EXTRACT 1
From A. J. P. Taylor, The Origins of the Second World War,
published 1961.
Hitler speculated a good deal about what he was doing. As it was,
he became involved in the world of action, and here, I think, he
exploited events far more than he followed precise coherent plans.
When other countries thought that he was preparing aggressive war
against them, Hitler was equally convinced that these others
intended to prevent the restoration of Germany as an independent
Great Power. His belief was not altogether unfounded. At any rate,
the British and French governments have often been condemned
for not undertaking a preventive war in good time.
Here is the key to the problem whether Hitler deliberately aimed at
war. He did not so much aim at war as expect it to happen, unless
he could evade it by some ingenious trick. I agree that there was no
clear dividing line in his mind between political ingenuity and small
wars, such as the attack on Poland. The one thing he did not plan
was the great war often attributed to him.
EXTRACT 2
From A. Boxer, Appeasement, published 1998.
The destruction of the Czech state made it clear that Hitler’s
ambitions went beyond the unity of all Germans. He had also
displayed contempt for the Munich Agreement. Most people in
Britain were now convinced that war with Germany was only a
matter of time. Chamberlain, however, remained hopeful that peace
would be secured. He recognised that he would have to take a
tougher line with Germany and that rearmament would have to be
accelerated but hoped that British firmness would bring Hitler to his
sense and make him willing to negotiate. Chamberlain was
reluctant to take steps likely to provoke Hitler into anything rash.
Exam focus (A-level)
Below is a sample high-level essay. Read the question and the
accompanying extracts, as well as the essay and the comments
around it.
find the view that it was ‘Hitler above all others who … drove
Germany down the road to war between 1933 and 1939’
(Extract 1)?
EXTRACT 1
From Richard J. Evans, The Third Reich in Power 1933–39,
published 2005.
War had been the objective of the Third Reich and its leaders from
the moment they came to power in 1933. From that point up to the
actual outbreak of hostilities in September 1939, they had focused
relentlessly on preparing the nation for a conflict that would bring
European, and eventually world, domination for Germany. The
propaganda image of Hitler as the world statesman who had given
Germans pride in their country almost single handedly did not of
course entirely correspond to reality. Even in the area of foreign
policy there were occasions, notably the annexation of Austria,
where he had followed the lead of others (in this case Goering), or,
as in the Munich crisis, been forced against his inclination to yield to
international pressure. Others, notably Ribbentrop, had also
wielded considerable influence on the decision-making process at
key moments. Nonetheless, it had indeed been Hitler above all
others who, sometimes encouraged by his immediate entourage,
sometimes not, drove Germany down the road to war between
1933 and 1939.
EXTRACT 2
From Tim Mason, ‘Some thoughts on the Origins of the Second
World War’, published 1971.
The economic, social and political tensions within the Reich
became steadily more acute after the summer of 1937. While it
seems safe to say that Hitler understood very little of their technical
content, it can be proved that he was informed of their existence
and was aware of their gravity. If the existence in the winter of
1937-8 of a conscious connection in Hitler’s mind between this
general crisis and the need for a more dynamic foreign policy
cannot yet be established, the relationship between these two
factors may nonetheless be suggested. The only ‘solution’ open to
the regime of the structural tensions and crisis … was more
dictatorship and rearmament, then expansion, then war and terror,
then plunder and enslavement. The stark ever present alternative
was collapse and chaos … A war for the plunder of manpower and
materials lay square in the dreadful logic of German economic
development under National Socialist rule.
Extract 1 clearly answers that ‘Hitler above all others’ drove

Germany to war. The extract argues that war had been a long-term
aim of the Nazi government and that German leaders had been
preparing for war since Hitler’s appointment as Chancellor in 1933.
Extract 2 puts forward a different view. Essentially, it argues that
Hitler was forced to go to war by the growing economic and political
crisis of the late 1930s. Therefore, while both extracts claim that
Hitler played a role in the outbreak of war, Extract 1 sees war as a
deliberate policy, whereas Extract 2 presents the invasion of Poland
as a reaction to circumstances.
The introduction summarises the interpretation of both extracts,

contrasting them and showing an understanding of the basis of
arguments offered by both authors.
Extract 1 claims that Hitler prepared Germany for war over the
entire course of his government. Evans claims that Hitler and his
government had ‘focused relentlessly on preparing the nation for a
conflict’. This view can be supported by the evidence of Nazi
ideology, which focused on the superiority of the Aryan race, and
which therefore aimed at ‘European, and eventually world,
domination’ for the master race. Hitler’s ideology, including his goal
of Lebensraum, and his desire to reverse the terms of the Treaty of
Versailles, therefore established the goals of the Nazi government
which led the nation to war.
Here the essay integrates own knowledge.
Extract 1 goes further, arguing that Hitler not only set the general
direction of policy, he made key decisions that took Germany to
war. There is certainly evidence to support this. Hitler personally
made the decision to remilitarise the Rhineland in 1936. Hitler was
also responsible for setting up the Four Year Plan Organisation and
briefing his military chief about future war, a meeting recorded in the
Hossbach Memorandum of 1937.
However, Extract 2 gives a different perspective. It argues that war
emerged from ‘the dreadful logic of German economic development
under National Socialist rule’ rather than Hitler’s long-term goals.
Extract 2 argues that Hitler’s economic policy created ‘economic,
social and political tensions’ leading to a ‘general crisis’ in the
winter of 1937–38. Some historians agree with this, pointing to
growing unrest among German workers as their living standards
dropped due to the focus on rearmament. War, according to Extract
2, was the ‘only “solution” open to the regime’ to the crisis created
by rearmament. According to this view, Hitler initiated a ‘war for the
plunder’, rather than a war for European and then world
domination, as Extract 1 claims. Extract 2 implies that Hitler
launched a limited war in Poland in 1939 simply to get more
resources, rather than intending to start a major war.
The essay uses own knowledge to discuss the arguments of both

extracts.
There are problems, however, with Extract 2’s argument. First, it
says there was a ‘crisis’ and that unrest was grave. However, as
Extract 1 points out, the Nazis had put a lot of effort into
propaganda, presenting Hitler as ‘the world statesman who had
given Germans pride in their country’. Levels of support for Hitler in
Germany were quite high during the 1930s, and the SS and
Gestapo had proved successful at ending resistance – therefore
Extract 2’s argument that Germany was experiencing a crisis so
grave that war was the only solution is not wholly plausible.
The essay evaluates the argument of Extract 2 using own

knowledge and evidence from Extract 1.
Extract 1 argues that Ribbentrop and Goering also played a role in

taking Germany to war. Ribbentrop replaced Neurath as German
Foreign Minister in 1938, leading to a radicalisation in foreign policy.
Indeed, Ribbentrop negotiated the Nazi–Soviet Pact, which helped
clear the way for an invasion of Poland. Goering, as Extract 1
notes, played a key role in Anschluss. He also headed the
rearmament drive, mentioned in Extract 2. Goering also
exaggerated the success of the rearmament drive and the
readiness of the airforce, perhaps leading Hitler to overestimate
Germany’s ability to fight a war in 1939.
This paragraph extends the range of the essay by considering the

secondary argument in Extract 1.
While Ribbentrop and Goering were influential, as Extract 1 argues,

it was Hitler, ‘above all others’, who set the course for war. Hitler
initiated the rearmament drive that Goering headed, Hitler
dismissed Neurath and appointed Ribbentrop, and it was Hitler who
set out his vision of conquest to generals in 1937. Indeed, in many
ways Ribbentrop and Goering were merely ‘working toward’ Hitler
by finding ways to fulfil his vision.
Here the essay uses own knowledge to evaluate the argument of
Extract 1.
In conclusion, Extract 1 is right to argue that Hitler, more than any

other, ‘drove Germany down the road to war’. Extract 1 is also right
that Hitler had been preparing for war since 1933, through setting
up the rearmament program and through propaganda. Hitler had a
long-standing commitment to restore German honour through
military strength and he was prepared to gamble with war, as he did
over the Rhineland in 1936. However, Extract 2 may hold the key to
the kind of war Hitler anticipated in 1939 – a blitzkrieg, rather than a
full-scale European war. After all, Hitler tended to believe that
Britain and France were weak, and therefore may not have
anticipated that war with Poland would lead to war across Europe.
Nonetheless, Extract 2 gives too little emphasis to Hitler’s role, and
focuses too heavily on economic and political problems, because
Hitler consistently made the most of circumstances, using them to
achieve his goals.
The conclusion makes a supported judgement about the argument

of both extracts.
This essay achieves a mark in Level 5 as it interprets

both extracts with confidence, and clearly understands
of the basis of their interpretations. It also integrates
evidence from own knowledge in order to presents a
supported overall judgement on the views given in both
extracts.
Exam focus (AS-level)
Below is a sample high-level essay. Read the question and the
accompanying extracts, as well as the essay and the comments
around it.
Historians have different views about how far Hitler’s foreign
policy was responsible for the Second World War. Analyse and
evaluate the extracts and use your knowledge of the issues to
explain your answer to the following question.
How far do you agree with the view that ‘Hitler’s policies were
responsible for the outbreak of war in 1939?’
EXTRACT 1
From Victoria Harris, Interpretation, published 2015.
Historians have tended to view Hitler’s actions in 1939 as a
realisation of Nazi ideology. Hitler did make his imperial plans very
clear in Mein Kampf. The National Socialists’ foreign policy was,
from the outset, focused on incorporating all ethnic Germans into
the greater Reich, as well as destroying Bolshevism during the
move east in search of greater Lebensraum, or living space. Hitler
was under no illusions that the quest for European dominance
would require war.
Germany also engaged in a series of aggressive actions that
destabilised the status quo after 1933. Germany left the League of
Nations, started rapidly rearming, began offering military support to
Franco and remilitarised the Rhineland. Historians have used this
evidence to argue that Hitler’s policies were responsible for the
outbreak of war in 1939.
EXTRACT 2
From Andre Flint, Nationalism Dictatorship and Democracy in
Twentieth Century Europe, published 2015.
Having reunited German-speaking people into the Third Reich with
the Anschluss and the seizure of the Sudetenland, Hitler turned his
attention to Poland.
Finally realising that Hitler was not simply seeking a fair territorial
settlement for Germany, but wanted European domination, the
Western democracies agreed to protect Poland from German
attack. Historians debate how far Hitler truly wanted a global conflict
at this point; some argue that he hoped that he would only have to
fight a small scale local war.
Whatever his intentions, an attack on Poland was a massive
gamble. The British had promised to fight to protect Polish
independence. Yet for Hitler, convinced that the Allies would not risk
war with Germany to defend Poland, it was a chance worth taking.
Hitler’s gamble did not pay off, the war became a global conflict.
The two extracts present different views about how far Hitler’s
foreign policy was responsible for the Second World War. Extract 1
argues that the war was caused by Hitler’s policies, which were
based on Nazi ideology, whereas Extract 2 argues that the war
occurred due to Hitler’s gamble over Poland.
The introduction summarises and contrasts the key interpretations

offered by both extracts.
Extract 1 points to the aggressive policies that Hitler pursued. It

argues that policies such as ‘offering military support to Franco and
remilitarised the Rhineland’ led to war. In essence, these policies
were aimed at overturning the Treaty of Versailles, which Hitler
viewed as a ‘dictat’ which took away German’s freedom. Hitler’s
policies were, according to Extract 1, based on ‘Nazi ideology’. In
the long term Hitler wanted to destroy Bolshevism, establish
Lebensraum and unite all Aryans in one state. Extract 1 argues that
these aggressive policies caused war because they led to conflict
with neighbouring countries, which caused war.
Here the essay integrates detailed own knowledge, using it to

discuss the view given in Extract 1.
However, Extract 2 points to the international context of the

outbreak of war. Whereas Extract 1 argues that it was the
ideological nature of Nazi policies that caused war, Extract 2 argues
that war came about because of Hitler’s willingness to take big
risks. Extract 1 and 2 both indicate that, for a time other countries
were prepared to tolerate Hitler’s aggressive foreign policy. For
example, the remilitarisation of the Rhineland, mentioned in Extract
1, took place in 1936, years before war took place. France had
wanted to resist the remilitarisation, but Britain was prepared to
accept Germany’s breach of the Versailles Treaty. From 1936 to
1938 Britain was willing to compromise with Germany. This explains
why ‘the Anschluss and the seizure of the Sudetenland’ mentioned
in Extract 2, did not lead to war. However, the policy of
appeasement ended after the Munich agreement. For Extract 2, this
is crucial in explaining the outbreak of war. The Polish Guarantee of
1939 committed France and Britain to support Poland. Hitler did not
take the Polish Guarantee seriously, but it made attacking Poland a
gamble. It was Hitler’s willingness to take risks, rather than the
general direction of his policy, that led to war because the ‘gamble
did not pay off’ and the invasion of Poland ‘became a global
conflict’.
This paragraph begins with by comparing the argument of Extract

1 with that of Extract 2.
While Extract 1 focuses on the ideological roots of Nazi policy, it

also implies that Hitler’s policy responded to events, as Extract 1
discusses Germany’s ‘military support to Franco’, which was not
part of Hitler’s mission to create Lebensraum or a ‘racially pure’
Germany. Extract 2 also points to Hitler’s pragmatic side, noting
that in 1939 he may have wanted ‘a small scale local war’ that
Germany could win, rather than a war of global conquest. Hitler’s
willingness to act pragmatically also undercuts Extract 1’s argument
about Hitler pursuing ideological policies that led to war, because it
indicates that he was prepared to act pragmatically, rather than
following an inflexible ideological policy that would inevitably lead to
war.
Here the essay uses evidence from both extracts to evaluate the
view given in Extract 1.
Overall, Hitler’s policy alone cannot be the cause of war. His policy,
as both extracts show, was broadly consistent – it always aimed at
expansion. However, it was only in 1939 that this policy of
expansion led to war. What changed was the reaction of Britain and
France and Hitler’s perception of the risk of war. In 1936 Hitler
viewed the remilitarisation of the Rhineland as a huge risk.
However, after Britain and France accepted it, he assumed that
Britain and France were too weak and cowardly to stand up to
Germany. Hitler interpreted Britain’s willingness to accept the
Anschluss and German domination of Czechoslovakia as further
evidence that Britain and France would not stand up to Germany.
Therefore, in 1939 Hitler was ‘convinced that the Allies would not
risk war with Germany to defend Poland’. This led him to gamble.
However, in 1938 Britain’s attitude had changed – Chamberlain was
no longer willing to accept German expansion. Therefore, Hitler’s
policy of invading Poland did lead to war, as Extract 1 claims, but it
was not the policy alone. Britain’s policy had changed more than
Hitler realised and, as Extract 2 argues, Hitler’s gamble did not pay
off and led to war.
The essay concludes with a well-supported overall judgement,

which discusses the interpretations presented in both extracts.
This essay gets a mark in Level 4 as it analyses the
interpretations of both extracts, integrating detailed own
knowledge to reach a supported overall judgement
about the interpretations of both extracts.
4 Democratic government in West
Germany, 1945–89
Return to democratic government: the

creation of the Federal Republic of
Germany, 1945–49
Defeat and occupation
At the Yalta Conference on the future of post-war Europe, the USSR,
the USA and Britain agreed to divide Germany between four zones of
occupation: the French in the west, by their border; the British in the
north-west; the USSR in the east; the USA in the south. The capital
city, Berlin, which lay deep inside the Soviet occupation zone, was
also to be divided between the four powers. The Potsdam
Conference (17 July–2 August 1945), held after the Nazis had been
defeated, reaffirmed the decision to divide Germany.
The Yalta Conference

The Conference was held before the Second World War was over,
but when the Allied powers were certain of victory. The conference
was held between 4 and 11 February 1945 at Yalta in the Crimea.
The three main decision-makers were Josef Stalin, leader of the
USSR; US President Franklin D. Roosevelt; and British Prime
Minister Winston Churchill. At the time of the Yalta Conference, the
USSR’s Red Army was only 40 miles away from Berlin and occupied
a vast swathe of Eastern Europe. It was agreed at the conference
that the pre-war borders of Poland would be moved westwards, with
the Soviet Union permanently keeping the eastern part of the
country. The Polish borders on the west were to be shifted into what
had been German territory. It was decided that there would be free
elections in Poland and in other Eastern European countries.
However, it was also agreed that the USSR, which had been
attacked by Germany via Eastern Europe, would have a ‘sphere of
influence’ in Eastern Europe. Democratic elections were not likely to
be compatible with this.
The beginnings of the Cold War
The period after the Second World War saw conflict develop between
the victorious powers, as the Soviet Union worked to strengthen its
influence in Eastern Europe and the United States sought to limit the
expansion of communism in Europe and the world. The two
superpowers were keen to ensure their power and security, and were
divided by their conflicting ideologies.
Tensions came to a head over the occupation and government of
Germany. In the eastern Soviet zone, a pro-Soviet communist
government was established, while the authorities in the Western,
anti-communist British, American and French occupied zones
increasingly co-operated with one another. Tensions rose through the
first half of 1948, as the Soviets increasingly disrupted travel to and
from Berlin. In June 1948 the British, American and French zones
unified their zones into what was called Trizonia. A new currency, the
Deutschmark, was introduced in the Trizone, despite Soviet
opposition.
The Berlin blockade
Stalin wished to secure Soviet dominance over the whole of Germany
and doubted the commitment of the USA to remain as occupiers,
particularly in Berlin. He also felt that the unification of the rest of
Germany posed a threat to Soviet power. In response to the
introduction of the new currency in the Trizone, Stalin launched the
Berlin blockade on 24 June 1948. Land and water connections into
non-Soviet West Berlin were cut off, and rail and road traffic into the
city stopped. Water was suspended and on 25 June, food supplies
were also ended. Stalin aimed to force Britain, America and France
out of Berlin. In response, as air routes remained open and were
subject to an international agreement that the Soviets respected, the
Western Allies launched a massive airlift operation to keep West
Berlin supplied. At its height, the Berlin Airlift saw a plane full of
supplies reaching Berlin every 30 seconds.
Not wishing to provoke a war, the Soviets did not obstruct the airlift
and on 12 May 1949, ended the blockade. The Berlin Blockade was
the first open conflict of the Cold War.
The establishment of the Federal Republic
of Germany
On 23 May 1949, shortly after the blockade had ended, the Trizone
became the Federal Republic of Germany (FRG or West Germany).
The country was no longer officially occupied, although a substantial
Allied military presence remained. In October 1949, the German
Democratic Republic (GDR or East Germany), under Soviet
domination in the east, was announced. Germany was to be divided in
this way for 41 years.
Mind map
map below.
Complete the paragraph adding this link in the space provided.
How far do you agree that the government of Germany was
German defeat in the Second World War and occupation by the

Allies caused another transformation in the government of
Germany. The Nazi dictatorship ended and power passed to the
administrations of the four victorious powers: the USA, the Soviet
Union, Britain and France. Not only was the country controlled by
foreign powers, but also the government of Germany was
transformed by the division of the country into four zones, one
controlled by each of the four occupying powers. By 1949, the US,
British and French zones had reunified, but the Soviet-controlled
eastern section remained separate. Ultimately, one of the major
transformations in the government of Germany that resulted from
the Second World War was the creation of two separate Germanys
at this time: a capitalist West Germany and a communist East
Germany. In the western Trizone, steps were gradually taken to
restore democracy to Germany – in this sense, the end of Nazi
dictatorship was not so much a transformation but a restoration of
parts of the Weimar system. Overall,
___________________________
___________________________
___________________________
The denazification policies of the Western
Allies, 1945–49
At the Potsdam Conference, the Soviet Union, the USA and Britain
agreed to prosecute leading Nazis and sought to remove from
positions of power or influence those who had contributed to the
regime. This policy was known as ‘denazification’. In post-war
occupied Germany, the Nazi Party was banned, the legal system
denazified, and symbols of Nazi rule destroyed. Senior Nazis and
military figures were arrested. In the initial period following the war
there was considerable enthusiasm among the victorious powers for
denazification, but full implementation of the policy was deemed to be
impractical. After 1949, the policy all but ended.
The liberation of the camps and
denazification
At the time of the liberation of death camps such as Bergen-Belsen,
Allied soldiers often forced local populations to view the evidence of
the atrocities committed by visiting the camps. Sometimes, German
civilians were compelled to assist with the burial of bodies of the
victims. This confrontation with the destruction and suffering wrought
by the Nazi regime was partly an attempt to denazify the general
population.
War crimes trials
A major focus of the denazification process were the Nuremberg war
crimes trials of 1945–46. Under the jurisdiction of four judges (one
from each of the occupying powers) an international criminal court
presided over war crimes trials of senior Nazis. The first trial involved
the prosecution for war crimes of 23 people, mainly senior Nazis. Ten
of these defendants were executed, and Hermann Goering, who was
sentenced to death, committed suicide the night before his execution.
Several organisations, such as the Gestapo and the SS, were indicted
and found to be ‘criminal’. Further trials followed, including cases
against judges and doctors who had been complicit with the regime.
The Nuremberg trials represented denazification in the sense of
bringing some of those responsible for atrocities to justice, and it also
provided a forum to present the evidence of Nazi criminality to the
German public and wider world.
Cultural and educational denazification
Symbols of Nazi rule, such as the large swastika at the Nuremberg
stadium, were destroyed. In education, efforts were made to retrain
teachers (see page 52).
The limitations of denazification policies
Denazification did not continue after the election of Konrad Adenauer
(see page 86) and in 1951 a law was passed calling the process in
West Germany to a halt. By this stage, the Allies did not oppose this
move.
How far do you agree that actions of the Allies were responsible
for creating the stability of Federal Republic of Germany
Support Challenge
War crimes trials brought some senior Nazis
to justice
Denazification helped to reduce the appeal
of Nazi ideas
Defeat in the war caused disillusionment
with Nazi ideas
The Allies’ denazification policy caused
resentment among some Germans
Denazification was a limited policy that left
many people who had been active Nazis in
positions of power and influence
Recommended reading
• Frederick Taylor, Exorcising Hitler – the Occupation and
Denazification of Germany (2011), pages 277–312
• Ann Tusa and John Tusa, The Nuremberg Trials (2003), pages 11–
15
• Telford Taylor, The Anatomy of the Nuremberg Trials – A Personal
Memoir (1992), Chapter 8, ‘On Trial’
Establishing democracy from 1949
In the decades after the Second World War, West Germany
developed into a peaceful, prosperous and mainly stable nation, with
a Western-oriented, pro-US foreign policy. Germany became a
member of NATO and enjoyed substantial economic development
(the Wirtschaftswunder, or economic miracle) which produced higher
living standards. Politics in the era until the mid-1960s was dominated
by Chancellor Konrad Adenauer, the first elected leader of post-war
West Germany, and his Christian Democratic Union (CDU) party.
The Basic Law
The new Federal Republic of Germany was governed under the terms
of a ‘Basic Law’ which acted as its constitution. The Allies retained a
veto on German law and the new state was not free to determine its
foreign policy, but the Basic Law saw the restoration of democracy to
Germany. Under the Basic Law:
• A Bundestag or Federal Parliament, elected by universal suffrage in
elections, was to be held every four years. Half of the seats were
allocated proportionally, and half on a first-past-the-post system.
The Bundestag debated and passed laws.
• The Chancellor was the head of government and most powerful
politician. The Chancellor was appointed by the President, and
needed the approval of the Bundestag, and was usually the head of
the largest party in the Bundestag.
• The President had limited, mainly ceremonial powers and was
appointed by a Federal Convention for a maximum of two five-year
terms. The Federal Convention was made up of half Bundestag
members and half members of local state parliaments.
• The Bundesrat was made up of members of local state parliaments
and had a veto over legislation passed by the Bundestag.
• A Federal Constitutional Court could rule on what was constitutional.
• FRG was a federal system – state Parliaments were elected every
four or five years and had considerable powers to enact laws at
local level.
The Weimar Constitution and the Basic Law of the

FRG
The Basic Law tried to deal with some of the perceived flaws in the
Weimar’s constitution in order to try to make democracy in Germany
stronger and more stable.
• The powers of the President were limited.
• Parties needed to get a minimum of 5 per cent of the vote in order
to get any representation in the Bundestag, a measure aimed at
preventing small extremist parties gaining representation.
• A Chancellor and his government could only be brought down by a
vote of no confidence if another party was ready to govern and
able to form a government that had the support of more than half
of the members of the Bundestag.
• Only half of the seats in the Bundestag were determined on the
basis of proportional representation, in order to try to make it
easier to form stable governments.
• The constitutional court upheld basic civil rights and could rule on
whether government actions were illegal.
• The Basic Law also emphasised human rights and pledged the
government to uphold them.
The CDU and the SPD
The CDU was formed after the Second World War out of the remnants
of the Catholic and fairly conservative Centre Party. Catholic
conservatism was less tainted by association with the Nazis than
other strains of right-wing politics, and Adenauer’s CDU built itself into
a powerful political force in the new Germany. The new party did not
promote itself as a Catholic party, and proved very successful at
attracting the votes of right-wing and centrist Protestants. The party
also contained Christians who held socialist beliefs, but Adenauer was
firmly anti-socialist and a believer in capitalism and a pro-American
foreign policy.
The Social Democratic Party (the SPD), which had continued to exist
in exile and underground throughout the war, re-established itself in
post-war West Germany, initially as a Marxist party in favour of the
unification of Germany. Their first post-war leader was Kurt
Schumacher.
the information on the opposite page and elsewhere in this book to
reach a judgement about the importance of these general points to
the question posed.
Write a number on the spectrum below to indicate their relative
importance. Having done this, write a brief justification of your
placement, explaining why some of these factors are more important
than others. The resulting diagram could form the basic of an essay
plan.
How far were the changes to Germany’s constitutional
arrangements made in 1949 caused by defeats in war?
1 Defeat in war
2 Breakdown of political systems
3 Impositions by foreign powers
the margin.
How far do you agree that Constitutional Law in Germany was
Constitutional Law was transformed in Germany between 1918 and

1949 to some extent. The Basic Law constitution introduced in 1949
was in part a return to the Weimar Constitution established in 1919,
but it also contained important differences. Weimar is a town in
Germany where the constitution was written in 1919. The Basic Law
restored democracy to (West) Germany, and like the Weimar
system, there were elections to the federal parliament every four
years on the basic of universal suffrage. As in the Weimar system,
the Chancellor and the government needed the support of the
Parliament. However, there were various significant changes in the
Basic Law in comparison with the Weimar Constitution which were
designed to make democracy in the FRG stronger and more stable
than that in Weimar Germany. One difference was that it was not so
easy to remove a Chancellor through a vote of no confidence – a
new government needed to be ready to be formed and in
possession of sufficient support from Parliament. Furthermore, the
new system reduced the proportional element in the voting system
and made it harder for small extremist parties, such as the Nazis
had been, to gain representation. The Nazi Party was founded in
1919 in Munich by Anton Drexler. The President, who was
considered to have had too much power in the time of President
Hindenburg, had very little power in the FRG, and could only
appoint a Chancellor with Bundestag approval. Overall, the new
constitution of the FRG was not a transformation in comparison with
Weimar’s constitution, but it did contain certain major modifications.
Consolidation under Adenauer and Erhard,
1949–66
Adenauer in power, 1949–63
Konrad Adenauer, a former Centre Party mayor of Cologne and
President of the Prussian State Council who had been imprisoned by
the Nazis, was instrumental in the establishment and development of
the CDU and became its first leader. In the first West German
Bundestag elections of August 1949, the CDU emerged as the
strongest party and a month later, with the support of the right-wing
Free Democrats, 73-year-old Adenauer was chosen by the Bundestag
to be the first Chancellor of post-War Germany. In power, Adenauer
dominated government and pursued certain policies vigorously.
Integration, not denazification

Adenauer denounced the denazification policies and instead launched
a policy whereby former Nazis were to be integrated in post-war
Germany. Adenauer argued that this was necessary to build a unified
and harmonious country. Even when his state secretary, Hans Globke,
was revealed to have been involved in drafting anti-Semitic laws in
Nazi Germany, Adenauer refused to sack him. He also called upon
the Allies to commute the sentences of those convicted of war crimes.
Restitution
Adenauer did, however, believe that Germany needed to make
amends to the Jewish people for Nazi crimes against them, and
supported the formation of a Claims Conference for Jewish victims of
Nazism and also the payment of large reparations to Israel, as the
representative of the Jewish people. This payment of 3 billion
Deutschmarks to Israel was pushed through by Adenauer with SPD
support, in the face of opposition from many Germany people and
many in the CDU. The German Restitution Laws were passed in
1953, although they were limited in their scope.
Western-oriented foreign policy
Adenauer believed that the future of Germany lay with a Western-
oriented (that is, US- and French-orientated) foreign policy, and with
this in mind, he rejected Stalin’s (probably insincere) overtures about
possibility creating an independent and non-aligned unified German
state in 1952. He pushed for Germany’s membership of the US-
dominated security alliance NATO, which was attained in 1955 in
return for various German pledges committing to limiting their future
military capabilities. Adenauer was instrumental in creating a degree
of unity with France through the creation of the European Coal and
Steel Community.
The Berlin Wall

Construction of the Berlin Wall was started in August 1961 by the
East German government to separate the Communist eastern part of
the city from the west. The East German government claimed its
construction was to prevent infiltration in East Germany, but in fact its
primary purpose was to stop emigration from the east to the west.
The Wall came to symbolise divided Germany.
A social market economy

Adenauer and Economics Minister Ludwig Erhard pursued a mixed
economic model, combining capitalism with social welfare (see page
88). This helped create social harmony, and along with the strong
economic growth of the post-1950 era, helped to create legitimacy
and stability in the FRG.
Later years
Following his success in assuring the return of the final 10,000
German prisoners of war held by the Soviet Union, Adenauer’s CDU
won a strong victory in the 1957 election. Later this year he supported
the formation of the European Economic Community (EEC), which
further strengthened links with France. Adenauer stepped down from
power in 1963 after a scandal implicating the government in
repressive practices, and died in 1967 at the age of 91.
A new Chancellor: Ludwig Erhard, 1963–66
Ludwig Erhard, who had been a highly successful Economics Minister
under Adenauer, and prior to that Director of Economics for the British
and American occupied zones, became Chancellor of West Germany
in 1963. Erhard unsuccessfully pursued German reunification, and
resigned following budgetary difficulties in 1966.
Develop the detail

How accurate is it to say that between 1949 and 1989 the
government of the Federal Republic of Germany was
economically strong and politically stable?
In many respects the government of the Federal Republic of

Germany was strong and stable. The Chancellors of the FRG were
generally in power for fairly long periods of time and they presided
over stable governments. This was particularly true during the time
that Konrad Adenauer was Chancellor. Adenauer was Chancellor
for a long time and did not face any votes of no confidence. Stability
was also created by his policy of the social market economy. The
government of Ludwig Erhard was not so strong and stable, and it
only lasted for three years before he resigned.

the judgement.
How far was Konrad Adenauer responsible for the strength and
stability of the FRG’s political system between 1949 and 1963?
Overall, Adenauer was responsible for the FRG’s strong and stable
political system to some degree
___________________________
___________________________
Adenauer was responsible for FRG’s strong and stable political

system to a significant degree
___________________________
___________________________
Economic recovery and the ‘economic
miracle’, 1945–66
In the years after the establishment of the FRG, West Germany
enjoyed strong economic growth, low inflation and rising living
standards. The transformation from war devastation to a global
economic power was labelled an ‘economic miracle’ –
Wirtschaftswunder.
The Wirtschaftswunder, 1950–60
Jobs The unemployment rate fell from 11 per cent to only 1.2
per cent.
Economic National income almost doubled from 845 billion
growth Deutschmarks to 1,633 billion.
Industrial Industrial development increased by 150 per cent. New
development industrial developments such as VW at Wolfsburg were
developed.
Living Real incomes rose after 1952.
standards
Causes of the Wirtschaftswunder
The Deutschmark, 1948
In June 1948 a new currency, the Deutschmark (DM), was introduced
into the non-Soviet zones of Germany to replace the Reichsmark
(RM). Wage levels in DM were at the same level as for RM, but
savings were exchanged at a very low level of 6.5DM to 100RM.
Savers were very badly hit, but debts of some 400 billion RM were
written off, which gave a much-needed stimulus to the economy.
The end of price controls

On the same day as the introduction of the new currency, Ludwig
Erhard, in his role as Director of Economics in the British and
American zones, ended price controls. This had the effect of
increasing the supply of goods to the market. This reform stimulated
the economy and contributed to economic recovery.
Loans for industry and high levels of public

and private investment
Banks were given money by authorities to loan to businesses to get
industrial investment restarted. Industrial investment increased by 50
per cent following this move. In addition to the loans, greater stability
was created by the currency reforms, and after a few years of peace
helped to encourage business to feel confident to invest. The
Investment Aid Law of 1952 provided subsidies to assist with
industrial development.
Local authorities also invested heavily in transport, educational, social
and cultural infrastructure at this time. Job creation schemes were
developed from 1950.
Tax cuts
Tax cuts helped to stimulate the economy by increasing the money
that people had to spend, which in turn increased production of goods.
For those on lower incomes, the tax level was reduced to 18 per cent.
The Marshall Plan

The $1.5 billion transferred to Germany from the USA under the
Marshall Plan helped to rebuild German infrastructure and generate
confidence.
The social market economy

The mixed economic model proved highly successful in creating
economic growth and maintaining stability in West Germany. The
country combined capitalist free enterprise with governmental
oversight to prevent unfair practices, and the ownership by the state of
parts of the economy, such as the railways, and state provision of
welfare services. Furthermore, the model of worker involvement in
commercial enterprises, often established by British managers in
occupied Germany in plants such as VW after the war, was extended.
Workers’ representatives sat on the boards of German companies and
had a right to be consulted about major decisions. This helped
maintain harmony between workers and management, which assisted
with economic development.
Other factors behind the Wirtschaftswunder

Other factors included the development of a trade surplus, as German
manufactured goods proved popular round the world. The surpluses
could be invested in further development. Furthermore, Germany had
an educated workforce, many raw materials and good sea ports for
exporting goods. In addition, the pursuit of cooperation and integration
with other European states such as France in the EEC (see page 94)
helped with economic stability and development and promoted lower
tariffs, which helped to stimulate international trade.
Establish criteria
criteria based on the key term, which you can use to reach and justify
a judgement.
How accurate is it to say that the government’s economic
policies were effective in Germany and the FRG between 1933
and 1966?
Definition:
___________________________
___________________________
Criteria:
___________________________
___________________________
___________________________
Reach a judgement
Having defined the key term and established a series of criteria, you
should now make a judgement. Consider how far the government’s
economic policies were effective in Germany and the FRG between
1933 and 1966 according to each criterion. Summarise your
judgements below.
Criterion 1:
___________________________
___________________________
Criterion 2:
___________________________
___________________________
Criterion 3:
___________________________
___________________________
Criterion 4:
___________________________
___________________________
The nature of support for democracy in the
FRG, 1949–66
The democratic regime was generally widely supported during the
period 1949–66 and moderate, centrist politics were popular.
Support for the system
After the devastating defeat that fascism had produced, the majority of
people in the FRG supported the new democratic regime. The
successes it had in economic policy and the support it had from
powerful countries such as the USA helped to bolster support for the
regime. Support for the system is indicated in the high turnouts in
elections (generally 80–90 per cent) in the FRG and in the lack of
support that extremists received.
Party political support
The Christian Democrats (CDU/CSU)
The CDU and its allied sister party, the Christian Social Union of
Bavaria (CSU), dominated politics in Germany in the years after the
establishment of the FRG. As 50 per cent of West Germany was
Catholic, the Catholic roots of the CDU/CSU had widespread appeal
and its conservative stance appealed to many Protestants, too. The
success that the CDU-led governments under Adenauer had with
economic policy and living standards in the early years of the FRG
helped boost support for the CDU/CSU. The party moved politically to
the centre and supported the creation of a welfare state and a social
market economy. These policies, and its pro-Western foreign policy,
were popular. The incorporation of workers’ representatives in
management structures in industry also helped to create stability and,
in turn, support for the CDU/CSU. Support for the CDU in elections
grew from 31 per cent in 1949 to 50.2 per cent by 1957.
The Social Democrats (SPD)

The Social Democrats had survived underground since the Nazi era,
and might have been expected to resume their position as the most
popular party, as they had been in Germany since 1912. The party did
pick up large amounts of support from workers, but the successes of
the Christian Democrats and the radicalism of the SPD reduced their
appeal and meant that they struggled to gain enough votes to form a
government, and in 1959 the SPD gained 32 per cent of the vote. In
response to this, in 1959, the SPD dropped their anti-clerical policies,
which were not very popular in with many Germans, and moved away
from Marxist politics to adopt a moderate centre-left position. This left
the party in a good position to profit from growing disillusionment with
the CDU/CSU from the mid-1960s, but it also caused disillusionment
with the SPD, and fuelled the more radical ‘new left’ movements (see
page 96).
Establish criteria
criteria based on the key term, which you can use to reach and justify
a judgement.
How far were politics in West Germany characterised by
consensus in the years 1949–74?
Definition:
___________________________
___________________________
Criteria:
___________________________
___________________________
___________________________

How far were politics in West Germany characterised by
consensus in the years 1949–74?
Overall, Adenauer was responsible for the FRG’s strong and stable
political system to some degree
___________________________
___________________________
Successes in economic policy and rising living standards helped to
boost the consensus about the democratic political system in West
Germany in that
___________________________
___________________________
After the SPD moved to the centre in 1959, there was a degree of
consensus between the two main parties in that
___________________________
___________________________
Maintaining political stability under Brandt,
Schmidt and Kohl, 1966–89
From the mid-1960s, the FRG faced increasing strains as relations
deteriorated with East Germany following the construction of the
Berlin Wall in 1961, and the economy did not grow as strongly. Ludwig
Erhard was replaced as Chancellor and leader of the Christian
Democrats by Kurt Kiesinger, who entered into a ‘Grand Coalition’
with the SPD. SPD leader Willy Brandt became deputy Chancellor
and Foreign Minister. Kiesinger’s government fell in the face of rising
criticism of his government’s authoritarian tendencies (see page 98)
and Kiesinger’s status as an ex-member of the Nazi party.
Willy Brandt in power, 1969–74
The SPD had been growing in popularity partly because of the support
they received from the young. Willy Brandt, who had been involved in
active underground resistance to the Nazis during the war,
represented a more comprehensive break with Germany’s Nazi past,
and he had also won widespread acclaim for his principled opposition
to the construction of the Berlin Wall. There were great expectations
for Brandt’s government but, as the economy continued to struggle
and inflation developed in the 1970s, many were disappointed.
Brandt’s governments also faced challenges from political extremists
(see page 96). Brandt did succeed, through his Ostpolitik (‘East
Politics’), in normalising relations with East Germany. As part of
Ostpolitik:
• Brandt visited East Germany and the two Germanies recognised
each other as independent states in 1973.
• Ostpolitik saw Brandt improve relations with communist Eastern
Europe more generally, something perhaps best represented by his
visit to Poland in 1970, during which he signed an agreement
recognising Poland’s post-war borders.
• Also on this visit, in a gesture symbolising German remorse for the
war and the Holocaust, Brandt dropped to his knees at the Warsaw
Ghetto memorial.
• Despite domestic ambivalence about these measures, their success
ensured Brandt obtained a victory in the 1972 elections.
He resigned in 1974 when a close advisor was found to be an East
German spy.
Helmut Schmidt in power, 1974–82
Helmut Schmidt, Brandt’s Economics Minister, took over as
Chancellor. Schmidt continued with Ostpolitik and formed a coalition
with the Free Democratic Party (FDP) after 1974. Tensions developed
between the two parties, however, and Schmidt faced difficulties in
dealing with inflation and the rise of the Green movement (see page
96). He lost a vote of no confidence in the Bundestag in October 1982
and resigned.
FRG governments, 1966–89

Dates Governing party / coalition Chancellor
1966– Grand Coalition – Christian Democrats / Kurt Kiesinger
69 SPD
1969– SPD / Free Democrats Willy Brandt
76
1976– SPD / Free Democrats Helmut
83 Schmidt
1983– Christian Democrats / Free Democrats Helmut Kohl
90
Helmut Kohl in power, 1982–90
Schmidt was replaced by Christian Democrat Helmut Kohl. Kohl
continued with Ostpolitik and worked to develop European integration
with the EEC. He worked with President Reagan of the USA and
General Secretary Mikhail Gorbachev of the Soviet Union to bring an
end to the Cold War.
Mind map
map below.
Recommended reading
• Viola Herms Drath, Willy Brandt – Prisoner of his Past (reissued,
2005)
• Stephen Padgett (ed.), Adenauer to Kohl – The Development of
the German Chancellorship (1994)
• Alexander von Plato, translated by Edith Burley, The End of the
Cold War? Bush, Kohl, Gorbachev, and the Reunification of
Germany (2015)
Surviving economic challenges, 1966–89
Recession
In the mid-1960s, Germany experienced a mild recession.
Unemployment levels and inflation grew. These were still fairly low, at
3.8 per cent and 4 per cent respectively, but the downturn in the
economy temporarily shook people’s confidence in West German
prosperity. Partly in order to respond to these challenges, the Grand
Coalition government was formed (see page 92).
The Grand Coalition’s response to
recession
The new Economics Minister, the SPD’s Karl Schiller, responded to
the recession by introducing a more planned economy. His measures
included:
• A Stabilisation Law 1967, which was designed to improve
cooperation between federal government, employers and
employees in economically difficult times (a policy known as
‘concerted action’). The law created the potential for central
government powers to increase in order to alter taxes and raise
loans to stimulate production.
• Greater central government powers to direct economic policies in
the regions of Germany.
• Reducing public spending and raising taxes: VAT went up from 10 to
12 per cent.
These measures proved successful, as unemployment and inflation
reduced and Germany’s strong economic growth resumed.
Revaluation
From the late 1960s, strong demand for the Deutschmark and a high
level of exports meant that there was pressure to revalue the currency
to make its value higher in relation to other currencies. The Grand
Coalition could not agree on a policy for this, and it collapsed as a
result. Willy Brandt’s new government proceeded with raising the
value of the currency by more than 9 per cent. Despite the fact that
this move increased the cost of German exports to foreign consumers,
German goods had a reputation for quality and continued to be
popular abroad.
The 1973 Oil Shock
Post-war European economic growth had relied upon cheap imports
of oil. In October 1973, however, the Organization of Petroleum
Exporting Countries (OPEC) announced that its members would
increase the price of oil by 70 per cent while also reducing output by 5
per cent. This oil price ‘shock’ had the effect of significantly increasing
the cost of production in oil-importing countries, such as West
Germany. The FRG’s economy was hit by the oil shock, and
unemployment rose, but overall the West German economy coped
quite well with the crisis.
West German economic indicators

Year Economic growth Unemployment rate
1973 5.3% 1.2%
1975 0.4% 4.7%
There were a number of reasons why the FRG’s economy coped fairly
well with the oil shock, compared with other countries:
• a high level of exports
• a switch to nuclear power and away from oil
• public works schemes to support job creation
• support for the private sector totalling 7–8 billion Deutschmarks
• the removal of restrictions on the creation of larger enterprises
• the extension of the role of the EEC benefitted Germany.
The EEC
The European Economic Community was formed by the Treaty of
Rome in 1957. The Community built on the success of the European
Coal and Steel Community (see page 86). The founder members
were West Germany, France, Italy, the Netherlands, Belgium and
Luxembourg. Its aim was to promote European harmony and
prosperity through creating a common market and a customs union. In
1973, the United Kingdom, Ireland and Denmark had also joined the
EEC. In 1978, under Helmut Schmidt’s leadership, a European
Monetary System (EMS) was created in order to harmonise the
currencies of Europe and try to prevent inflation. The Deutschmark
became the key currency in the setting of exchange rates for
currencies in the EMS.
selection.
How accurate is it to say that the governments of the FRG dealt
with economic challenges effectively between 1966 and 1989?
It is accurate to say that the FRG dealt with the oil shock of 1973
effectively between 1966 and 1989 to a limited/fair/considerable
extent. This was partly because of the strengths of the German
economy, such as the high quality of the goods that it produced for
export, but was also because of concerted government action. The
West German government took steps to reduce the country’s
dependency on oil by, for example, investing in nuclear fuel. They
also took measures to support German industry at this challenging
time, and provided over 7 billion Deutschmarks for this purpose.
Furthermore, the government tried to reduce the effect that the oil
shock might have on unemployment by investing in public works
schemes. Overall, while unemployment did rise and economic
growth fell substantially, the FRG still coped better than most other
countries with the oil crisis, and in this sense, dealt with this
particular economic challenge very/somewhat/not very effectively.
___________________________
___________________________
Simple essay style

Choose four general points and provide two or three pieces of
specific information to support each general point.
How accurate is it to say that the governments of the FRG
managed economic challenges effectively between 1966 and
1989?
Political dissent and active challenge,
1949–89
In the first few years after the end of the Second World War, active
opposition to the new state was rare. The exhaustion caused by war
and total defeat, along with the rising levels of prosperity, might
account for this. From the 1960s, however, some people, particularly
the young, became involved in ‘new left’ opposition movements. The
participants were often frustrated by the limits of German democracy
and the country’s failure to confront its Nazi past. A generational
conflict developed between the middle-aged and old, who did not want
to talk about the past, and the young, post-war generation. Mass
protests and sit-ins characterised the actions of the student
movement, while extremist anti-capitalists the Red Army Faction
(RAF) launched a sustained campaign of terrorism.
The student movement
Underfunding, teacher shortages and lack of student representation at
German universities caused tensions among German students from
the mid-1960s. The Free University in West Berlin became a particular
site of student discontent. The student movement came increasingly
under the influence of the radical leftist Socialist German Students’
Union (SDS). Under the leadership of Rudi Dutschke, the SDS
campaigned on a wide range of issues, including against the Vietnam
War, against nuclear proliferation and to try to prevent former Nazis
retaining positions of power in the FRG. In response to students’
protests in 1965 and 1966, the government increased expenditure on
higher education.
In the late 1960s, the student movement continued to engage in
protest and in new forms of living, such as communes. In 1968, during
the global upsurge of protest that occurred during that year, Rudi
Dutschke was shot by a neo-Nazi, an event that provoked massive
protests. The student movement lacked support from most of wider
society and its influence began to wane in the late 1960s. Dutschke
advocated peaceful change in society, but some of those involved
began to endorse more radical methods from this time.
Radical politics and the Red Army Faction
(RAF)
The radical leftist group the Red Army Faction (which received
financial backing from the East German state) sought an end to
consumerist capitalist society and were also opposed to the Vietnam
War. The RAF believed that radical action was the only way to
achieve change in society. The group was also known as the Baader-
Meinhof gang after two of its members, Ulrike Meinhof and Andreas
Baader, were involved in radical action such as the bombing of a
department store in Frankfurt in 1968. In the 1970s the group turned
to assassination and kidnapping. In total, 28 people were murdered by
the RAF and many others were injured. RAF bombings and murders
continued into the 1980s, but the extremism of the group had
alienated many voters that might otherwise have supported some of
their political positions. The group finally announced its dissolution in
1998.
The RAF and the German Autumn

In 1977, the Red Army Faction’s activities reached their peak during
the events known as the Deutscher Herbst (German Autumn):
• The RAF targeted prominent and powerful figures and in April 1977
assassinated the West German Attorney General, Siegfried
Buback.
• In July, the group killed the head of the Dresdner Bank, Jürgen
Ponto.
• The most dramatic events occurred in autumn 1977. On 5
September, the RAF kidnapped Hans Martin Schleyer, President of
the German Employers’ Association and a former member of the
SS, in an ambush that killed four others. The RAF forced Schleyer
to appeal to the government for the release of RAF members held
in jail. Three of these, including Baader, were found dead in their
cells on 18 October, and the RAF murdered Schleyer in response
and hijacked a plane, the Landshut.
Neo-Nazism
A number of small neo-Nazi groups continued to exist in the FRG,
including the Socialist Reich Party (see page 98). These groups
unified into the National Democratic Party (NDP) in 1964. This party
never achieved the 5 per cent of the vote required to attain
representation in the Bundestag, however – although on occasion, it
did achieve more success at local level.
The Green Party
From the 1980s, the establishment and development of the Green
Party provided a democratic and peaceful outlet for those who
politically opposed the mainstream politics of the Christian Democrats
and the SPD. Feminists also often became involved in the Green
Party. The existence of the Green Party may have been one reason
why there was less extremist activity in Germany during the 1980s.
Mind map
map below.
Identify key terms
Below is a sample question which includes a key word or term. Key
terms are important because their meaning can be helpful in
structuring your answer, developing an argument and establishing
criteria that will help form the basis of a judgement.
How accurate is it to say that there was strong popular support
for the political system of the FRG between 1949 and 1989?
• First, identify the key term. This will be a word or phrase that is
important to the meaning of the question. Underline the word or
phrase.
• Second, define the key phrase. Your definition should set out the
key features of the phrase that you are defining.
• Third, make an essay plan that reflects your definition.
• Finally, write a sentence answering the question that refers back to
the definition.
Now repeat the task using the question below, and consider how the
change in key terms affects the argument, structure and final
judgement of your essay.
How accurate is it to say that there was little effective opposition
to the political system of the FRG between 1949 and 1989?
The constitutional and legal response to
political extremism, 1949–89
The FRG was initially somewhat limited in its constitutional ability to
respond to political extremism. The subversion of the emergency
‘Article 48’ provisions of the constitution by politicians such as Franz
von Papen in the Weimar era resulted in there being no such clause in
the new FRG constitution. Consequently, the West German authorities
attempted repeatedly to introduce provisions for them to act in an
emergency. The constitution did, however, allow political parties which
sought to undermine democracy to be banned, and on these grounds,
the Socialist Reich Party was banned in 1952.
The Socialist Reich Party

This essentially Nazi party, formed by ex-Nazis, was banned by the
constitutional court in 1952. The party denied the legitimacy of the
FRG and espoused vaguely socialist notions, along with continuing
to promote Nazi ideas such as Lebensraum and anti-Semitism. The
party had around 10,000 members, and gained two representatives
in the Bundestag and a number of seats at local level, such as in
Lower Saxony in 1951.
Emergency powers
In 1958, 1960 and 1963 attempts were made to introduce legislation
which would provide for the extension of the powers of the
government in the event of a national emergency. These all failed, as
the SPD did not support this move. However, after 1965, as part of the
Grand Coalition, the SPD changed its stance. In May 1968, following
a number of years of student protests, the emergency legislation
finally became law and was written into the constitution. The
emergency powers gave the government the power to suspend civil
liberties and intercept mail, tap phones and search homes.
Some Germans objected to the Emergency Law as it seemed to mark
a return to the authoritarianism of Germany’s past. However, the Law
had various restrictions designed to prevent it resembling the Enabling
Act designed by the Nazi Party in 1933:
• The Bundestag remained in session during an emergency and had
to agree with the declaration of a national emergency.
• The constitutional court continued to operate during an emergency.
• The emergency measures would end no longer than six months
after the end of a national emergency and the Bundestag, and not
the government, could decide when a national emergency ended.
Government action in the 1970s
The Brandt and Schmidt governments took strong action against the
RAF in 1972, including launching a huge police operation to track
down RAF operatives and banning far-left radicals from public service
jobs. In 1973, the Bundestag passed measures to make prison
conditions harsher for those involved in terrorist activities. Following
the events of the ‘German Autumn’ (see page 96), measures were
adopted which restricted the rights of RAF members in prison to
communicate with each other or their lawyers, preventing the RAF
from publically disseminating their ideas. In total, 6,000 people were
placed under police surveillance.
Government action in the 1980s
As the threat from the RAF declined, the government in the 1980s
focused upon rooting out neo-Nazi groups, and a number of these
were banned.

Below are a sample essay question and three assertions. Read the
exam question, then add a justification to each assertion to turn it
into an argument.
How significant were the challenges made to West German
democracy in the years 1949–89?
Radical political parties were only a limited threat to democracy

because
___________________________
Extremist groups in West Germany posed a real challenge to the

democratic system because
___________________________
The actions which the government took against political extremism

were successful because
___________________________
Identify an argument
Below are a series of definitions, a sample exam question and two
sample conclusions. One of the conclusions achieves a higher mark
because it contains an argument. The other achieves a lower mark
because it contains only description and assertion. Identify which is
which. The mark scheme on page 114 will help you.
• Description: a detailed account.
• Assertion: a statement of fact or an opinion which is not
supported by a reason.
• Reason: a statement which explains or justifies something.
• Argument: an assertion justified with a reason.
To what extent was there continuity in the treatment of
opponents of the political systems in Germany and West
Germany between 1933 and 1989?
Overall, there was continuity in the treatment of opponents to the

political system in the Nazi era and in West Germany to some
extent. A degree of continuity can be found in some of the
authoritarian aspects of policies of the FRG, such as in the
surveillance and phone tapping that occurred in the 1970s.
Opponents were also imprisoned in harsh conditions in both
systems. However, the treatment of opponents of the system in
Nazi Germany was far more repressive. People were executed or
held without trial. Furthermore, people might be persecuted for very
minor acts of opposition – in contrast, those imprisoned in the FRG
tended to have committed far more serious crimes. In conclusion,
the continuity between the two systems in this area was only fairly
limited.
In conclusion, opponents of the political systems were imprisoned

during both the Nazi era and in the FRG. The members of the Red
Army faction were an example of this, although they had committed
crimes such as bombing and kidnapping. There was also
surveillance and phone tapping. In the Nazi era, there was also a
system of concentration camps and people could be locked up for
any reason or none. Some opponents of the regime were executed,
such as members of the White Rose. This was very repressive.
Even minor acts of opposition might be enough to result in
persecution. The FRG was, however, essentially a democracy.
Changing living standards, 1945–89
Living standards increased dramatically from the time of the end of the
Second World War until the 1980s. The FRG became a prosperous
consumer society with one the highest standards of living in the world.
Consumer spending
A sign of prosperity was that between 1950 and 1965, the level of car
ownership increased six-fold to approximately 12 million cars. By the
1980s, 95 per cent of West Germans owned items such as washing
machines and televisions, and went on two holidays a year.
The cost of living
In West Germany there was a plentiful supply of consumer goods and
low inflation, which meant that it was a very affordable place to live.
By 1989, the cost of living in Britain was some 25 per cent higher than
that in the FRG. High levels of productivity growth (that is, the
economic output produced by each worker) between 1950 and the
mid-1970s helped to drive improved living standards. The cost of
basic foodstuffs also fell, which helped support rising living standards.
The cost of living did not always continually improve, particularly in the
1970s, when inflation increased to 6 per cent. However, fairly
harmonious relations between German workers and their employers
meant that while trade unions generally helped to maintain living
standards as prices increased (by asking for higher wages for their
members), demands for wage rises were generally moderate. This
also helped restrict inflation. From the mid-1980s, the cost of living
started to fall again, and once again living standards rose.
Housing
In the early years of the FRG, there was a housing shortage which
saw many families share homes – 4 million houses had been
destroyed by Allied bombing during the war. As more houses were
constructed over the years, this practice ended and the amount of
living space for each family increased. The average amount of space
each person had in their dwelling rose from 19 square metres in 1950
to 30 square metres in 1980. The quality of housing also improved
gradually, with, for example, a reduction in the number of homes with
an outside toilet.
Education policies in the FRG
In the immediate post-war period, the occupying authorities rushed to
try to denazify the German education system. New curricula and
textbooks were quickly brought out, and German teachers were sent
on re-education programmes. The British and the French authorities
sent some British and French teachers to teach in Germany, while the
US authorities invested heavily in resources for German schools and
established a training programme for German teachers in the USA.
Mind map
Use the information on the opposite page and elsewhere in this book
to add detail to the mind map below.
Develop the detail

Below is a sample exam question and a paragraph written in answer
to this question. The paragraph contains a limited amount of detail.
Annotate the paragraph to add additional detail to the answer.
How accurate is it to say that living standards in Germany and
the FRG rose continuously between 1933 and 1989?
In the FRG, there were many improvements in living standards, and

living standards did generally rise continually, with the exception
perhaps of a small blip in the 1970s. The standard of living rose
because people had more disposable income. West Germany
became a consumerist society and people had access to modern
consumer goods. Furthermore, people’s standard of living rose
because the quality of housing, so damaged during the Second
World War, rose.
The role and status of women in the FRG
The constitution of the FRG proclaimed that men and women were
equal, so it might be expected that the role and status of women in the
FRG would be significantly different to that in the Nazi era. However,
traditional attitudes about the role of women remained strong, and
women did not achieve equality in areas such as wages.
Women in the workplace
• In the early years of the FRG, the government promoted the idea
that women needed to return to their role as wives and mothers
following the disruptions that the war had caused.
• The experience of wartime and its immediate aftermath, when many
women had supported their families single-handedly, had changed
some women’s attitudes about their role. Many of the
Trümmerfrauen (‘rubble women’), who had worked to clear and
reconstruct bomb-damaged areas, refused to give up their jobs.
• Labour shortages also meant that it was impractical for large
numbers of women to give up their jobs. The rate of female
employment increased from 44.4 per cent of the population in 1950
to 50 per cent in 1970.
• Women were not employed on an equal basis to men, however,
earning only around 65–78 per cent of the rate of men for similar
occupations.
• Women also tended to be employed predominantly in a restricted
range of occupations, such as caring and nursing.
• In areas such as politics, women did not tend to have positions of
power and still only occupied around 15 per cent of representatives
in the Bundestag by the late 1980s, and there were only small
numbers of women in managerial roles in most parts of the
economy.
Most Germans, including many women, continued to feel that a
woman’s role was as homemaker and carer for her children, and the
attitude that women with small children should not work at all
remained widespread.
Feminism, divorce and abortion law and
the Greens
Despite the persistence of inequality and traditional views about the
proper role of women, changes did occur to the role and status of
women. From the 1960s onwards, some German women began to
embrace feminist ideas that challenged inequality and the idea that
women should be restricted to certain roles in society.
Partly as a result of the work of this movement, divorce law was
changed in 1977 to allow for no-fault divorce and also the provision of
financial support to a dependent spouse who had given up work to
support a family.
Abortion law was also altered in 1976 to allow for abortion in the first
12 weeks of pregnancy in certain circumstances. Feminists felt that
the law was too restrictive, but the law was not changed during the
existence of the FRG.
In the political arena, the success of the Green Party saw more
women became involved in politics.
Simple essay style

information on the opposite page and elsewhere in this book to
produce a plan for this question. Choose four general points and
provide two or three pieces of specific information to support each
point.
How accurate is it to say that women’s roles as mothers and
homemakers remained unchanged in Germany and West
Germany in the years 1918–89?
Develop the detail
How far did the role of women in Germany and West Germany
To some extent, the role of women in West Germany changed

compared to the Nazi era. More women worked, and some women
became actively involved in politics. However, traditional attitudes
about the role of women remained strong and, particularly in the
early years of the FRG, women were encouraged to return to the
home, after many of them had become involved in paid work during
the Second World War. The idea that women with children should
not work was a widely held belief. Furthermore, even though many
women worked, they did not earn as much as men in the same
roles. It was only in the 1970s that more change occurred to the role
of women, as some women embraced feminism, and divorce and
abortion law became more liberal. In the 1980s, the Green
movement saw more women becoming actively involved in politics.
There were, then, some changes to the role of women in the era of
the FRG compared with the Nazi era and Weimar eras, but the
traditional idea of women as homemakers with children remained in
place.
The status of, and attitudes towards, ethnic
minorities in the FRG
In the FRG, minorities still faced discrimination and the state did not
treat foreign ‘guest workers’, who were often Turkish, as equal
citizens.
Guest workers in the 1950s
As West Germany’s economy grew in the 1950s, the country needed
an increased labour supply. The government looked to foreign
workers to fill the gap, but did not want these people to emigrate
permanently to FRG with their families. In the mid-1950s, the West
German government signed an agreement with Italy that would see
100,000 Italian workers come to Germany. Workers from Yugoslavia
were also encouraged to come. The ‘guest workers’ were given
temporary contracts, and were not entitled to citizenship, as
entitlement to German citizenship was based upon ‘German heritage’,
rather than residency or even birth.
Turkish guest workers in the 1960s
In 1961, the West German government signed an agreement with the
Turkish government to bring hundreds of thousands of Turkish
workers to Germany as ‘guest workers’. Most worked in Germany’s
major industrial centres. By the end of 1964, 1 million guest workers
had come to Germany. Many did not return home, but stayed on and
continually renewed their work permits. More and more guest worker
families were based in Germany, and the government increasingly
provided services such as basic accommodation to these families, in
recognition of their crucial role in the economy.
Problems and discrimination in the 1970s
The increasing permanence of guest worker families and the
economic downturn in the 1970s provoked some prejudiced and
discriminatory attitudes in the FRG. As in other European countries,
there was anti-immigration sentiment in West Germany. In late 1979
and 1980, there were even attacks on Jewish memorials and guest
worker accommodation.
The state also did not treat the children of guest workers as German
citizens, even when they were born and fully educated in Germany,
and some were deported when they turned 18. Furthermore, the state
started to incentivise guest workers to return home during the
economic problems of the 1970s, a policy which many guest workers
viewed with resentment.
More and more Turkish families lived in German neighbourhoods and
not in the separated guest worker accommodation, however, and
became a permanent part of German society.
The 1980s
In the 1980s there were increasing restrictions on immigration to
Germany, but also increased recognition of the right of guest workers
and their families to settle in Germany.
possible options (in bold) is the most appropriate. Delete the least
selection.
How far were there continuities in the treatment of ethnic
minorities and foreign workers in Germany and West Germany
in the years 1933–89?
There were continuities in the treatment of ethnic minorities and

foreign workers between the Nazi era and the FRG to a
limited/moderate/significant extent. In the FRG, citizenship was
not based upon residency or even birth, but upon the notion of
being ethnically German. This has some parallels with the exclusion
of Jews from German citizenship, as the idea was still based on
spurious ideas of what it meant to be ‘German’. However, those
excluded from citizenship in Nazi Germany had no rights and faced
persecution. In the FRG, the human rights of ‘guest workers’ were
protected, and their children were educated in German schools.
Similarly to the Nazi era, foreign workers in the FRG were often
housed separately from the rest of society. Unlike in Nazi Germany,
however, many families did move eventually to ordinary
neighbourhoods and were not held in labour camps. There were,
then, a few/some/many continuities in the treatment of ethnic
minorities and foreign workers in Germany and West Germany
___________________________
___________________________

How far did the position of ethnic minorities and foreign workers
in Germany and West Germany transform in the years 1932–
89?
The Nazi government transformed the position of Jews and Roma

minorities in Germany in the 1930s in that
___________________________
The Nazi government attempted to destroy Jewish and Roma

minorities in Germany during the Second World War, through
policies which
___________________________
In the FRG, the treatment of ethnic minorities and foreign workers

by the state improved, as
___________________________
However, unequal status, discrimination and racism remained in the

FRG, as
___________________________
Exam focus
Below is an exam-style question and a sample question. Read it and
the comments around it.
How accurate is it to say that that the government of Germany
and West Germany was transformed between the years 1930–
63?
The government of Germany was transformed to a significant extent

between 1930 and 1963. However, the democratic government that
was re-established in West Germany in 1949 was to some extent a
restoration of the political system that had been functioning
reasonably effectively at the start of 1930, and in this sense, the
government of Germany was temporarily transformed during the
Nazi era and immediate post-war years, but ultimately went back to
its pre-Nazi state, at least to a degree.
A clear, but balanced answer to the question.
In many respects, the government of Germany was transformed

between 1930 and 1963. At the start of 1930, Germany had a
coalition government and a powerful head of state in the shape of
President Hindenburg. Governments in the Weimar era had often
proved themselves to be weak and short-lived, and the Grand
Coalition, which had been formed in 1928, collapsed in 1930 over
disagreements about economic policy. Hindenburg refused to
support his Chancellor, Müller, in these disputes. In contrast, by
1963, West Germany had a much more stable government: Konrad
Adenauer had at this point been Chancellor of a Christian
Democratic government since 1949. In the West German political
system, the President was much weaker and did not have so much
power to undermine or replace Chancellors. Chancellors and their
governments could also only be removed by the Bundestag if
another viable government was ready to be formed. Furthermore, the
West German political system was only partially proportional and
less characterised by political fragmentation, and so it was easier
than in the Weimar era to form stable governments.
In some ways, however, the situation in 1963, in comparison with
that in 1930, did not represent a transformation. Both systems of
government involved multi-party democracy, universal suffrage,
general elections every four years, an elected parliament which
agreed to laws, an elected President and a federal system with an
assembly that represented the regions. The real transformation of
government of Germany occurred during the Nazi era, and this was
only a temporary transformation.
In the Nazi era 1933–45, democracy in Germany was ended and
dictatorship established. The Chancellor, Adolf Hitler, was given
dictatorial powers to bypass the Reichstag in the Enabling Act of
March 1933. In 1934, the office of President was merged with that of
Chancellor and Hitler gained even more power. Parliamentary
elections were not held after 1933, and even the plebiscites that did
occur were not free or fair. Other political parties were banned, trade
unions were taken over by the Nazi Party and there was no freedom
of the press or freedom of expression. After the Reichstag Fire
Decree of February 1933, people could be arrested and held for any
reason, or none. Furthermore, normal governmental decision-making
procedures did not generally occur during the Nazi era, and there
was no longer the rule of law. Policies were determined upon and
implemented in a somewhat chaotic situation, and became more and
more extreme.
Supporting detail.
All of this contrasted with the situation in both 1930 in Germany and
in 1963, when Germany and West Germany were functioning
democracies largely governed by the rule or law, and with political
and civil rights guaranteed and decision-making processes that
involved the cabinet and the Bundestag. The transformation that
occurred in the government of Germany was thus largely during the
Nazi era, when a dictatorship characterised by repressive policies
and ever-growing extremism was established.
German government was transformed once again in the immediate
post-war era, after Germany had lost the war and had to submit to
foreign occupation. At this time, while some German politicians (such
as Ludwig Erhard as Director of Economics) had some power,
decisions were often taken by the occupying forces, and could be
vetoed by them. The country was also separated in four zones of
occupation and governed for a time in this way. Ultimately, two
countries emerged – capitalist and democratic West Germany, and
communist East Germany. This separation, which remained in 1963,
represented another transformation in the government of Germany.
The later time period is addressed.
Overall, the government of Germany was transformed to some

extent between the years 1930 and 1963. Firstly, it was temporarily
transformed during the undemocratic and repressive Nazi era, when
free elections, multiple-party democracy, the parliament and the rule
of law were ended. Then a further transformation occurred as
Germany was occupied and divided. However, in West Germany
after 1949, a political system was established which in many ways
resembled that of the Weimar era, and so in this sense, government
of Germany was not transformed between 1930 and 1963. The
situation in 1963 was quite different, however, as a much more stable
government emerged in West Germany, compared with the Weimar
era.
This is a high-level response as it addresses the question

directly and provides a clear but balanced answer to the
question. It is also supported by a range of specific detail.
What makes a good answer?

You have now considered three high-level essays. Use these essays
to make a bullet-point list of the characteristics of a top-level essay.
Use this list when planning and writing your own practice exam
essays.
AS-level questions
Was political stability in Germany the main consequence of the
‘economic miracle’ between the years 1949 and 1963? Explain
your answer.
How far do you agree that there was a high degree of support for
the political system in Germany in the years 1963–89?
To what extent were ethnic minorities in Germany treated as

equal citizens in the years 1961–89?
Glossary
Aktion T4 Nazi programme to kill mentally and physically ill and
disabled people, which officially ran from 1939–41, but which
continued secretly afterwards. It resulted in the murder of more than
200,000 people. The programme was sometimes referred to as
euthanasia, when it was in fact murder.
Anschluss Union of Germany and Austria.
Appeasement Policy of making concessions to an aggressor to try
to avoid a war.
Aryanisation Nazi policy, from 1938, of seizing Jewish property and
giving it to non-Jewish ‘Aryans’.
Asocials Those excluded from the Nazi national community
because they exhibited behaviour not in keeping with Nazi ideology,
such as alcoholism, homosexuality or vagrancy.
Autarkic An economy that is self-sufficient.
Bauhaus Modern school of design founded in Germany in 1919.
Bergen-Belsen Nazi concentration camp liberated by the British in
April 1945, who found around 13,000 unburied corpses on the site
and around 60,000 starving prisoners. The camp held mainly Soviet
prisoners of war and Jews.
Block Wardens In Nazi Germany, a person responsible for the local
level political supervision of their neighbourhood. They would spread
propaganda and spy on their neighbours.
Blomberg-Fritsch Affair Blomberg and Fritsch were the Minister of
War and army Commander-in-Chief in the 1930s. Hitler felt they
were insufficiently supportive of his desire for territorial expansion
and war. In 1938, the two were forced to resign their positions after
largely concocted sex scandals. Hitler used the opportunity of their
resignations to increase his control over the army and establish a
new Supreme Command of the armed forces in order to weaken the
power of the traditional German army command structure.
Claims Conference Established in 1951 to seek compensation from
the German government for the persecution and loss of property of
Jews.
Cold War State of tension and conflict that existed between the
USSR and its allies and the USA and its allies between
approximately 1947 and 1990. The Cold War was characterised by
hostility and competition over ideology, politics, arms and
international influence. The two powers did not engage directly in
war, hence the idea of a ‘cold’ war. They did, however, fight each
other via proxies, for example in Vietnam and Afghanistan.
Concentration camp In Nazi Germany, camps where the Nazis held
their opponents or others, such as racial minorities, who did not fit
into their ideal for society.
Concordat Agreement signed between the Catholic Church and
countries’ governments.
Demilitarised Removing or not allowing a military force from an
area, for example, the Rhineland after the First World War
denazification The Allied policy post-Second World War of
attempting to rid German society and politics of the remnants of
Nazism and Nazi ideas.
Einsatzgruppen SS Death squads who followed the German army
as Germany conquered Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union
carrying out mass killings of ideological and ‘racial’ enemies of the
Nazis.
The Enlightenment Cultural movement to improve knowledge and
reform and advance society.
Eugenics The idea, common in the first half of the twentieth century,
that the genetic stock of humans can be improved through selective
breeding. Eugenics often contained racist assumptions.
European Coal and Steel Community Organisation established in
1951 which was a forerunner of the EEC and which contained the
same member states. It established a common market in coal and
steel between members.
European Economic Community (EEC) Association of European
countries, founded by the Treaty of Rome in 1957, aimed at
promoting economic integration among members. The original
members were West Germany, France, Italy, Belgium, the
Netherlands and Luxembourg.
Federal Convention Constitutional assembly in West Germany
which elected the President.
Freikorps Paramilitary (informal) groups of volunteer soldiers. In
inter-war Germany these groups were often strongly nationalist and
linked to extremist politics.
German Restitution Laws Laws passed in the 1950s which
regulated the provision of the compensation of Jewish victims of the
Nazis for persecution or loss of property.
Gleichschaltung Term referring to the process of co-ordination
carried out by the Nazis after their accession to power. This co-
ordination allowed the Nazis to extend their control over German
institutions and parts of the state such as the civil service. The
process could be regarded as one of nazification.
Grand Coalition Coalition government formed in 1928 in Germany.
The government included representatives from left and right and was
headed by Chancellor Muller of the SPD. The government was the
longest lived of the Weimar Republic.
Hoover Moratorium Temporary end to the reparations payments
that arose from the First World War, launched by US President
Herbert H. Hoover in 1931. He was aiming to help relieve the world
economic crisis.
Kristallnacht The Night of Broken Glass: an orchestrated wave of
Nazi violence and attacks on Jewish people and property on 9–10
November 1938.
League of Nations International organisation of nation-states
formed after the First World War with the aim of promoting
disarmament and world peace.
Lebensraum Literally, ‘living space’. Refers to the German aim of
pursuing territorial expansion in Eastern Europe.
Luftwaffe German airforce.
Marshall Plan American aid programme for Western European
which operated between 1948 and 1952, aimed at rebuilding
countries, restoring trade and reducing the potential appeal to people
of communism. In total, $13 billion was transferred from the USA to
Europe.
Marxist Communist system of economic and political ideas founded
by Karl Marx, which assumes that class struggle is a central part of
history and social change and that political structures have economic
bases; a belief in communal, collectivist politics.
Mixed economic model Economic system in which free enterprise
co-exists alongside government intervention in the economy and
government ownership of parts of the economy, for example, the
railway and energy networks.
NATO North Atlantic Treaty Organisation – a pact between various
countries, including Britain, France and the USA, to maintain each
other security in the event of an attack by an aggressor. In the
context of the Cold War, NATO entailed the United States
guaranteeing Western Europe’s security against a possible Soviet
threat.
Nazi–Soviet Pact Non-aggression pact signed between Germany
and the Soviet Union in August 1939 which meant that the Nazis
could invade Poland without fear that the USSR would attack them.
The pact also involved the definition of German and Soviet spheres
of influence over parts of Eastern Europe and after the German
invasion of Poland, the Soviets annexed parts of eastern Poland.
The pact was ended by the German invasion of the Soviet Union in
June 1941.
New Plan Nazi economic plan designed by Hjalmar Schacht and
launched in September 1934. The plan aimed to reduce
unemployment by providing government money to industry, reduce
Germany’s dependence on imports and stimulate trade by
negotiating bilateral trade agreements with other countries.
Night of the Long Knives Name given to the occasion on 30 June
1934 when Hitler and members of the SS arrested and murdered
Ernst Röhm and other SA leaders and the SA was brought under SS
control. A number of other political opponents of the Nazis, like von
Schleicher, were also murdered.
Non-aligned During the Cold War, countries allying themselves with
neither the USSR’s communist ‘east’, nor the USA’s capitalist ‘west’.
Nuclear proliferation Spread of countries possessing nuclear
weapons.
Potsdam City adjacent to Berlin that was a seat of the Prussian
Kings and German Kaiser until 1918.
Potsdam Conference Allied conference held in Potsdam after the
end of the war in Europe, attended by Josef Stalin, leader of the
USSR, Harry S. Truman, the new American president, and Winston
Churchill, British Prime Minister, who was replaced by Clement Atlee
of the Labour Party part way through the conference because the
Labour Party had won the British general election. The Conference
confirmed the division of Germany into zones of occupation, dealt
with polices on denazification and determined the borders of Poland.
Proportional representation Electoral system in which seats
allocated in parliament correspond exactly or very closely to the way
in which people vote. For example, if 10 per cent of voters vote for a
party, then that party receives 10 per cent of the seats in parliament.
Schutzstaffel (SS) Organisation that started off in the 1920s as
Hitler’s personal bodyguard, but expanded to become the main
agent of terror in Nazi Germany. The SS were fiercely loyal to Hitler
and his ideas. By 1934, the SS were rivals to the SA as the primary
enforcers of Nazism. The SS were led by Heinrich Himmler and were
responsible for repression and death camps in occupied territories in
Eastern Europe during the Second World War.
Second Reich Name for the unified German state that existed
between 1871 and 1918. It was a monarchical system, headed up by
a Kaiser, with a democratic element. The Second Reich fell at the
end of the First World War when, facing defeat and revolution, Kaiser
Wilhelm II abdicated.
Sicherheitsdienst (SD): Intelligence agency of the SS.
SOPADE Term for the Social Democratic Party of Germany (SPD) in
exile.
Treaty of Rome Agreement in 1957 that founded the EEC.
Volksgemeinschaft ‘People’s community’ a Nazi concept entailing
the unity of all members of the ‘racial’ community who adhered to
Nazi ideology. The Nazis aimed to create a unified
Volksgemeinschaft in Germany.
Warsaw Ghetto Jewish ghetto established by the Nazis in Warsaw,
the Polish capital in 1940. The ghetto was closed to the outside
world in November 1940. Conditions inside were extremely difficult
and hundreds of thousands of people died of ill health and
starvation. Others were later deported to death camps such as
Treblinka. Following an uprising of remaining inhabitants in 1943, the
ghetto was destroyed. Over 50,000 inhabitants of the ghettos were
killed during or shortly after the uprising.
Wehrwirtschaft War economy.
Weltpolitik ‘World politics’: the German policy developed from the
mid-1890s of seeking enhanced power and status in Europe and
around the world through colonial and military expansion.
Key figures
Konrad Adenauer (1876–1967) Christian Democrat leader and
politician, Adenauer was Chancellor of West Germany from 1949
until 1963. He presided over Germany’s transformation into a stable,
peaceful and prosperous country after the Second World War.
Willy Brandt (1913–92) Leading political figure in West Germany.
He had been in exile during the Nazi era, and was head of the SPD
and Chancellor from 1969–74. Brandt tried to strike a balance
between a pro-American position for West Germany and improving
relations with East Germany.
Frederich Ebert (1871–1925) Saddle-maker, trade unionist, political
activist and politician, Ebert was leader of the SPD party and the first
President of Weimar Germany between 1919 and 1925. Ebert
played a crucial role in the German revolution of 1918. As a
moderate socialist, he acted to crush the communist Spartacists in
1919 and reach an accommodation with the German army.
Joseph Goebbels (1897–1945) Leading Nazi politician and a close
associate of Hitler. Goebbels was responsible for propaganda in
Germany 1933 and 1945. He used modern technology to promote
Nazi ideology and the idea that Hitler was a wise and all-knowing
leader. In 1943, Goebbels persuaded Hitler to pursue a ‘total war’
strategy.
Heinrich Himmler (1900–45) Leading Nazi politician and leader of
the SS. Himmler became leader of the SS in 1929 and took this
fanatical paramilitary organisation from its roots as Hitler’s
bodyguards and eventually made it the most powerful part of the
Nazi state. The SS was the main organisation in charge of terror and
ideological policy in Nazi Germany and was responsible for
perpetrating the Holocaust. Along with Hitler, Himmler is one of the
individuals most responsible for the Holocaust.
Paul von Hindenburg (1837–1934) German general who was chief
of the General Staff of the army during the First World War.
Hindenburg was President of Germany between 1925 and his death
in 1934. His politics were conservative and nationalist, and he was
instrumental in both blocking Hitler’s accession to the Chancellorship
in 1932 and then in agreeing to bring Hitler and other Nazis into
government in January 1933.
Adolf Hitler (1889–1945) Austrian-born German fascist politician
and leader of the NSDAP (Nazi Party) from 1921. He was Chancellor
of Germany from 1933, and from 1934 became Führer, or dictator.
He was instrumental in the development of anti-Semitic practices
and policies in Germany and in the rise of tensions and conflict in
Europe that culminated in the outbreak of Second World War. He
was also instrumental in causing the Holocaust.
Helmut Kohl (1930–) Chairman of the Christian Democrats and
Chancellor of West Germany between 1982 and 1990 and reunited
Germany between 1990 and 1998. Kohl is considered to be the main
architect of the reunification of Germany and a leading figure in the
establishment of the European Union.
Timeline
1918 November Armistice ended the First World War and Kaiser
Wilhelm II abdicated
1919 February National Constituent Assembly formed and had its
first meeting at Weimar; Friedrich Ebert elected
President of the republic
July Spartacist uprising
1920 March Kapp Putsch
1923 January French and Belgian troops invade the Ruhr in
response to Germany failing to meet reparation
payments
August Gustav Stresemann becomes Chancellor and
Foreign Minister
November Introduction of the Rentenmark, which helps end
the inflation crisis
November Munich Beer Hall Putsch
1924 April Dawes Plan agreed with the Allies
1925 April General Hindenburg elected President
1929 February Wall Street Crash
June Young Plan agreed with the Allies
1930 March Heinrich Brüning becomes Chancellor; increasingly
relies on Hindenburg’s use of emergency powers
to pass legislation
1932 April Hindenburg beats Adolf Hitler convincingly during
the presidential elections
July Nazis become the biggest party in the Reichstag
1933 January Hitler is appointed Chancellor
February Reichstag fire
March Elections held and the Enabling Act passed
July All political parties disbanded apart from the Nazi
Party
1934 June Night of the Long Knives
July Schacht appointed Minister of Economics
September Schacht introduces the New Plan
August Death of Hindenburg and Hitler declared Führer
Nazis centralise control over education policy
1936 October Goering placed in charge of the Office of the Four-
Year Plan
1938 March Anschluss is announced with Austria
Membership of the Hitler Youth becomes
compulsory
November Kristallnacht
1939 September Hitler invades Poland; Britain and France declare
war on Germany
1941 June Germany invades the USSR
1942 January Wannsee Conference chaired by Heydrich decides
Jews need to be eliminated through the
establishment of death camps
1943 January Germany defeated at Stalingrad
1945 May Germany defeated in the Second World War and
Hitler commits suicide
June Yalta Conference
November Beginning of Nuremberg Trials
1947 Truman Doctrine and Marshall Plan implemented
January Creation of Bizonia
1948 June Berlin blockade and airlift begins
June Currency reform – introduction of Deutschmark
1949 May Formation of the FRG
August Konrad Adenauer of the CDU/CSU becomes the
first Chancellor of the FRG
August Appointment of Ludwig Erhard as Economics
Minister
October GDR is established
The Basic Law states that men and women are
equal
1955 FRG joins NATO
1961 Berlin Wall begins to be constructed
1963 October Adenauer resigns and is replaced by Ludwig
Erhard
1966 December Grand Coalition between the CDU/CSU and SPD
headed by former Nazi Party member Kurt
Kiesinger
1967 June Stabilisation Law
1969 October Willy Brandt of the SPD becomes Chancellor
1970 Escalation of violence against people by the Red
Army Faction (RAF)
1972 September Terrorist attacks at Munich Olympics
1974 May Brandt resigns and is replaced by Helmut Schmidt
1982 October CDU/CSU/FDP coalition established, headed by
Chancellor Helmut Kohl
1989 November Opening of the Berlin Wall
1990 October GDR is abolished and formally reunited with the
FRG
December First post-war all-German election returns Kohl as
chancellor of a reunited Germany
Mark schemes
AO1 mark scheme

• Analytical focus
• Accurate detail
• Supported judgement
• Argument and structure
AS A-level
Marks Marks
1–4 Level 1 1–3
• Simplistic, limited focus
• Limited detail, limited accuracy
• No judgement or asserted judgement
• Limited organisation, no argument
5–10 Level 2 4–7
• Descriptive, implicit focus
• Limited detail, mostly accurate
• Judgement with limited support
• Basic organisation, limited argument
11–16 Level 3 8–12
• Some analysis, clear focus (may be descriptive
in places)
• Some detail, mostly accurate
• Judgement with some support, based on
implicit criteria
• Some organisation, the argument is broadly
clear
17–20 Level 4 13–16
• Clear analysis, clear focus (may be uneven)
• Sufficient detail, mostly accurate
• Judgement with some support, based on valid
criteria
• Generally well organised, logical argument
(may lack precision)
Level 5 17–20
• Sustained analysis, clear focus
• Sufficient accurate detail, fully answers the
question
• Judgement with full support, based on valid
criteria (considers relative significance)
• Well organised, logical argument
communicated with precision
AO3 mark scheme
• Interpretation and analysis of the extracts
• Knowledge of issues related to the debate
• Evaluation of the interpretations
AS A-level
Marks Marks
1–4 Level 1 1–3
• Limited comprehension of the extracts
demonstrated through selecting material
• Some relevant knowledge, with limited links to
the extracts
• Judgement has little or no support
5–10 Level 2 4–7
• Some understanding of the extracts
demonstrated by describing some of their
relevant points
• Relevant knowledge added to expand on details
in the extracts
• Judgement relates to the general issue rather
than the specific view in the question, with
limited support
11–16 Level 3 8–12
• Understanding of the extracts demonstrated
through selecting and explaining some of their
key points
• Relevant knowledge of the debate links to or
expands some of the views given in the extracts
• Judgement relates to some key points made by
the extracts, with some support
17–20 Level 4 13–16
• Understanding of the extracts demonstrated
through analysis of their interpretations, and a
comparison of the extracts
• Relevant knowledge of the debate integrated
with issues raised by the extracts. Most of the
relevant aspects of the debate are discussed –
although some may lack depth
• Judgement relates to the interpretations of the
extracts and is supported by a discussion of the
evidence and interpretations of the extracts
Level 5 17–20
• Interpretation of the extracts demonstrated
through a confident and discriminating analysis
of their interpretations, clearly understanding the
basis of both their arguments
• Relevant knowledge of the debate integrated in
a discussion of the evidence and arguments
presented by the extracts.
• Judgement relates to the interpretations of the
extracts and is supported by a sustained
evaluative argument regarding the evidence and
interpretations of the extracts.
Answers
Page 7, Spot the mistake

At the end of the paragraph the answer should link back to the
question.
Page 11, Eliminate irrelevance

It is not really accurate to say that the Weimar Republic’s constitution
undermined stability in Germany in 1919–29. Most of the problems
that Weimar faced were nothing to do with the constitution. Although
the constitution did add to political instability, as the PR system made
it difficult to form durable governments, the main problems that
Weimar faced were political extremism and economic problems that
had nothing to do with the constitution. The political extremists
included the Spartacists, named after a Thracian gladiator, and the
Nazi Party, led by Hitler. Hitler was born in Braunau am Inn in
Austria, and later lived in Vienna. His failed career as an artist had
made him bitter. The existence of the extremists was more a result of
defeat in the war and not really to do with the Weimar constitution.
Use of PR for the electoral system made it easier for extremists to
gain representation in the Reichstag, but PR is a very democratic
election system that did not cause the existence of extremists. So
use of PR did not mean that the Weimar Republic’s constitution was
flawed from the outset.
Page 23, Support or Challenge?

Support Challenge
There were a number of attempts to ✓
overthrow the Weimar Republic including
the Munich Putsch, the Kapp Putsch and
the Spartacist Uprising
The international community supported ✓
Weimar’s survival via the Dawes Plan and
the Young Plan
The actions of Ebert and Stresemann ✓
helped the Republic to survive
The opponents of Weimar lacked public ✓
support before 1930
There were a number of Communist ✓
uprisings in the Weimar Republic
The attempts to overthrow the Republic ✓
were badly organised
Weimar’s economy performed well between ✓
1924 and 1929 and inflation was not a
problem at this time

At the end of the paragraph the answer should link back to the
question.
Page 25 Support or challenge?

Support Challenge
Stresemann called off the passive ✓
resistance to French occupation in 1923,
which helped restore some international
confidence in Germany’s economy
Stresemann negotiated the Dawes Plan, ✓
which saw money for investment flow into
Germany
The international loans to Germany in the ✓
1920s created a dangerous dependence on
the United States
Unemployment remained persistent ✓
throughout the 1920s
The German economy did not grow as ✓
much as other economies between 1924
and 1929
The German agricultural sector was in ✓
recession from 1927

The lives of some women were transformed in the Weimar era in
Germany. Some young women living in urban areas, particularly
Berlin, were able to live an independent and single life in a way that
had not been possible before the First World War. This was all part
of the more liberal and tolerant culture in Germany, and particularly
in Berlin. At this time there was a great deal of cultural
experimentation in Germany, as can be seen in the art work of
Kirchener, the designs of the Bauhaus and in the development of
cabaret as an art form. Furthermore, more women went to university
and trained and worked in professions in this era. However, most
women continued to occupy traditional roles within the family as
wives and mothers, and many working-class women had worked
before the Weimar era anyway, so the lives of these women were not
transformed.
Page 29, Identify an argument

The second answer gets a higher mark.
Page 35, Identify a concept

How far do you agree that Weimar democracy was always likely to
fail? SIGNIFICANCE
How accurate is it to say that the rise in unemployment was the most
important consequence of the economic problems that Germany
faced 1922–32? CONSEQUENCE
How accurate is it to say that the lack of support for democracy from
Weimar’s elite was responsible for Hitler’s appointment to power?
CAUSE
How far did the level of support for democracy in Germany change of
the years 1919–32? CHANGE/CONTINUITY
Page 45, Support or challenge?

Support Challenge
Active resistance to the Nazi regime was ✓
rare in the 1930s
Non-conformity and dissent were relatively ✓
widespread
There were some instances of protest ✓
against Nazi policies
SOPADE reports suggest a high level of ✓
support for Hitler
There were some opposition groups, such ✓
as the Edelweiss Pirates and left-wing
underground networks
The Bomb Plot was an attempt to overthrow ✓
the Nazi regime in 1944

At the end of the paragraph, the answer should link back to the
question.

SUPPORT CHALLENGE
In 1935, 5,000 people in Germany ✓
were convicted of high treason
100,000 people were held in ✓
concentration camps by the Nazis
after they gained power
Block Wardens monitored people on ✓
behalf of the Nazi party
The Gestapo often relied on ✓
denunciations from the public
There is evidence that many Nazi ✓
policies were popular

SUPPORT CHALLENGE
Some young women in Weimar ✓
Germany lived independent, self-
supporting lives
The Nazis discouraged women from ✓
working and restricted women’s places
at university to 10 per cent
The Nazis encouraged and ✓ ✓
incentivised women to stay at home
and have children
The number of women working ✓
increased during the 1930s
Most women had a traditional role ✓
within the family during the Weimar
era
Women were banned from many ✓
professional occupations during the
Nazi era
SUPPORT CHALLENGE
War crimes trials brought some senior ✓
Nazis to justice
Denazification helped to reduce the ✓
appeal of Nazi ideas
Defeat in the war caused ✓
disillusionment with Nazi ideas
The Allies’ denazification policy ✓
caused resentment in some Germans
Denazification was a limited policy that ✓
left many people who had been active
Nazis in positions of power and
influence

Constitutional Law was transformed in Germany between 1918 and
1949 to some extent. The Basic Law constitution introduced in 1949
was in part a return to the Weimar Constitution established in 1919,
but it also contained important differences. Weimar is a town in
Germany where the constitution was written in 1919. The Basic Law
restored democracy to (West) Germany, and like the Weimar
system, there were elections to the federal parliament every four
years on the basic of universal suffrage. As in the Weimar system,
the Chancellor and the government needed the support of the
Parliament. However, there were various significant changes in the
Basic Law in comparison with the Weimar Constitution which were
designed to make democracy in the FRG stronger and more stable
than that in Weimar Germany. One difference was that it was not so
easy to remove a Chancellor through a vote of no confidence – a
new government needed to be ready to be formed and in possession
of sufficient support from Parliament. Furthermore, the new system
reduced the proportional element in the voting system and made it
harder for small extremist parties, such as the Nazis had been, to
gain representation. The Nazi Party was founded in 1919 in Munich
by Anton Drexler. The President, who was considered to have had
too much power in the time of President Hindenburg, had very little
power in the FRG, and could only appoint a Chancellor with
Bundestag approval. Overall, the new constitution of the FRG was
not a transformation in comparison with Weimar’s constitution, but it
did contain certain major modifications.
Page 97, Identify the key terms

The key terms are: ‘strong popular support’ in the first question and
‘little effective opposition’ in the second.
Page 99, Identify an argument

The first answer gets the higher mark.

My Revision Notes - Edexcel AS - A - Barbara Warnock

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

My Revision Notes - Edexcel AS - A - Barbara Warnock

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

My Revision Notes - Edexcel AS - A - Barbara Warnock

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Acknowledgements

The Publishers would like to thank the following for permission to

eISBN: 978 1 4718 7650 9

1 The Weimar Republic, 1918–33

2 Nazi Germany, 1933–45

3 Historical interpretations: How far was Hitler’s foreign

4 Democratic government in West Germany, 1945–89

The creation of a republic, 1918–19

The Weimar Republic

The Bill of Rights

Complete the paragraph

I agree to a limited extent that the Weimar constitution undermined

It is not really accurate to say that the Weimar Republic’s

The Treaty of Versailles

Develop the detail

Support your judgement

It is generally accurate to say that the most significant problem

While inflation was a difficulty, it was not the most significant

The Dawes Plan, 1924

Living standards during the early years of Weimar

Support your judgement

To some extent the German government introduced effective

To a significant extent the German government introduced effective

To a limited extent the German government introduced effective

Develop the detail

As Chancellor and Foreign Secretary in the Weimar Republic,

The Spartacist Uprising, 1919

Strikes, risings and communist takeover

The Kapp Putsch, 1920

White terror: assassinations and violence

Lack of public support for democracy

In the early Weimar era, I agree to a limited/fair/great extent that

Poor leadership and planning

Lack of support from the public

The actions of Ebert

Support of some of the elite

Support from the international community

Complete the paragraph

Spot the mistake

Weimar artistic culture

The lives of some women were transformed in the Weimar era in

The effects of the Depression on living standards

In conclusion, the governments of Weimar did not generally have

The economic policies followed by the governments of Weimar

Weimar Chancellors 1928–33

Turning assertion into argument

The effects of the Depression in Germany had undermined

In addition, the actions of some members of the conservative elite

Furthermore, the situation in which the Weimar Republic had been

Identify the concept

How accurate is it to say that the rise in unemployment was the

How accurate is it to say that the lack of support for democracy

How far did the level of support for democracy in Germany

To some extent Germany was economically strong and politically

This introduction directly addresses the question.

In some respects, Germany was politically stable by 1929,

Accurate detail is used.

In economic terms, Germany appeared to be fairly strong by 1929.

The other side of the argument is explained and considered.