No Order From Hitler..?

This is just an essay I did for class; naturally it is not a professional opinion, nor would I say it is entirely complete. It is what it is.

Since the end of World War II the world has been attempting to make sense of the Holocaust. Part of that mystery is finding definitively who was to blame for what occurred. The obvious choice would be Adolf Hitler, but there is a problem: there is no direct order for the slaughter of millions of Jews and other undesirables. The problem of no direct order from Hitler creates many problems for historians, including how this problem creates room questioning how the Holocaust came to be and how much involvement Hitler actually had. Still, without hard evidence, most people assign the blame for the Holocaust to Hitler, which is very significant for history.

            Some historians believe that when the origins and details of the Holocaust come into question it opens the door for the “revisionists” and deniers. However, one hot topic for historians is the question of how the Holocaust developed. “Functionists” believe that “the murder of the Jews generally was the result of development of German society, from before the Nazis’ accession to power and throughout the short and stormy history of the Nazi regime” (Bauer, 2001, p. 211). According to the functioninsts, the Holocaust could have, and would have, happened under any other political group; it was the German society that made it possible. Historian Yehuda Bauer writes, “…the Nazi regime, divided as it was into semi-autonomous and mutually antagonistic fiefs of major Nazi figures whose allegiance was to Hitler personally, developed impasses and blind political and economic alleys from which there seemed only one way out: increasing radicalization” (p. 211). This led the authorities to attack the Jews. This school of thought also believes that the murders were a local initiative; “Hitler was little more than a legitimizing factor, but did not actively intervene in these matters as long as his obsessive radical, racist antisemitism was satisfied by underlings who executed the most radical anti-Jewish measures possible” (Bauer, p. 211). This means that, while it appears to the functionalists that there is no hard evidence linking Hitler to the Final Solution, he obviously did nothing to dissuade others from creating antisemitic orders from his ideals. In fact, Heinrich Himmler, along with other Nazi officials, often referred to Hitler’s “wishes” as if they were law, even though there are no records of the details of their discussions.

            Another school of thought is called “intentionalist”. The intentionalists believe that Hitler and Himmler had everything to do with the Final Solution: “that directives came straight from Berlin center … and from a core of ideological antisemites loyal to Hitler, and developed into a well-organized campaign of mass murder” (Bauer, p. 211). That means that the Holocaust would not have occurred if the Nazis did not exist; it was their radical ideals that created the concentration and death camps. This school does not, however, answer the question of why Hitler did not want his name linked to this murderous action, which to some may seem “uncharacteristic” since Hitler always spoke of bravery. For example, after Kristallnacht Hitler was seen as being “shocked and angry” about the destruction (Niewyk, 2011, p. 24). The explanation may be very simple: Hitler was a politician and did not was to be seen promoting an action that was not received favorably by the general population.

            Despite the professional arguments surrounding the Holocaust, Hitler is still most often said to be responsible. Why is this significant? Comprehending the Holocaust is difficult enough without having a “boogie man”. It scares us to think that this could happen anywhere at any time; we need Hitler to make us feel better about humanity for allowing the Holocaust to happen. Hate is so unacceptable that it embarrasses us as a civilized society to admit antisemitism exists on that scale. Blaming Hitler is largely a coping mechanism. It also simplifies everything; no tedious task of trying to determine who else was at fault, especially the German civilians who afterward claimed to have had no knowledge. For the men and women who actually perpetrated the acts of murder, the need to have others’ blame Hitler was important for their conscience and for their future social standing. Holocaust historian Christopher R. Browning writes in “Ordinary Men: Reserve Police Battalion 101 and the Final Solution in Poland” that after the battalion’s first slaughter of innocent Jewish women and children “Major Trapp made the rounds, trying to console and reassure them, and again placing responsibility on higher authorities” (1998, p. 69).

            While there is no physical direct order from Hitler in existence, the part he played in the Final Solution was pivotal. That is not to say that others, such as SS members and indifferent German bystanders, do not share the blame. Local initiatives occurring out of the idea that it was Hitler’s wishes are impossible to ignore. Since World War II Germany, has been trying to redeem itself on the world stage, passing laws that forbid Nazi-esc racism. As long as we do not forget the atrocities that occurred during the Holocaust, there is hope for the future.

Works Cited

Bauer, Y. (2001). A History of the Holocaust. Danbury: Franklin Watts.

Browning, C. R. (1998). Ordinary Men. New York: Harper-Collins.

Niewyk, D. L. (2011). The Holocaust: Problems and Perspectives (4th ed.). Boston: Wadsworth.