Abigail Green



„The circumstances of the war were mainly responsible for the Holocaust‟. How valid is this assessment of the Holocaust? Holocaust. Shoa. Churben. These names were created to illustrate the indescribably brutal period of modern history in which 6 million Jews plus millions of other minorities were mercilessly slaughtered for their beliefs. The Holocaust was not one action carried out at one time, but was the culmination of an on-going process of persecution, beginning when Adolf Hitler came to power as Chancellor of Germany on 30th January, 1933, and ending with the liberation of Death Camps in 1945. The Jews were the main targets of the Nazis, however this generally is not surprising as throughout history Jews have frequently been used as scapegoats, for example The Black Death, or the writings of the 15-16th century German monk Martin Luther who spoke out against the Jews, on whom Hitler possibly modelled his ideologies. The quote describes the ‘war’ as being the main reason for the Holocaust because it was at this time that the Final Solution and the majority of mass killings took place, however the persecution of Jews by the Nazis began long before the Final Solution. It is a biased statement as it is from a functionalist point of view. This school of historical thinking flourished in 1981 when the Marxist historian Timothy Mason coined the phrases ‘functionalist and intentionalist’ in one of his essays, however the original concepts arose in the early 1960’s when Martin Broszat, amongst others, began to challenge the conventional idea of the Holocaust (that Hitler had a master plan all along). These historians were later labelled as functionalists, and their viewpoint was that the Holocaust wasn’t planned step by step, rather that Hitler followed a ‘crooked road to Auschwitz’ and took any opportunities that arose, aiming to expel Jews from Europe but not to kill them. They believe the main cause for the Holocaust was the war, taking the view that Hitler wasn’t a totalitarian leader but took advice from Nazis of the lower ranks, allowing them to do his bidding without dictating many instructions. Intentionalists on the other hand believe that Hitler was a totalitarian leader who orchestrated every part of the Holocaust according to a long thought out plan, dating back to around 1924. Examples of intentionalists would be Andreas Hillgruber, Eberhard Jackel and Richard Breitman. A very notable historian is Lucy Dawidowicz who is known for her extreme intentionalist views.

which was of whether Hitler had conducted the Holocaust single handed. resulting in works such as that of Dawidowicz and opposing historians like Martin Broszat. germinating in Hitler’s subconscious for some fifteen years before it was to sprout into practical reality? Hitler’s ideas about the Jews were at the centre of his mental world. An especially poignant question materialized when Eichmann testified: ‘At that time obedience was demanded. This action in Dawidowicz’s eyes reflects Hitler’s long held hatred of the Jews. leaving millions starving. nor if the Germans hadn’t been seeking revenge for the Dolchstoss that created political and economic distress. Germany wanted a saviour. and during the War. the paranoid delusions that seized Germany after the First World War. They shaped his world view ……. Once in power. and it arose in the form of Adolf Hitler who promised the German people work. .. Without Hitler. as the emotive historical link between her past of once living in Poland in 1939 and losing friends and scholars to the Holocaust may cause her to have a biased opinion.. anti-Semitism into a radical doctrine of mass murder Lucy Dawidowicz. and the emergence of Hitler and the National Socialist movement..” Hitler . Document 9. The Germans were especially angry with the Treaty of Versailles that blamed Germany for beginning the war.Hitler could not have transformed the German brand of conventional. as without these factors Hitler wouldn’t have received the support that he had consequently gained. or whether there were a multitude of perpetrators? This spurred on new research into the Holocaust. “If at the beginning of the war. Hitler immediately set about undermining the Jews in Germany. just as in the future it will also be demanded of the subordinate. bread and revenge on those that had ‘stabbed Germany in the back’. ‘The War Against The Jews’ was created during a period of relative global upheaval.. Dawidowicz’s view was perhaps due to her Jewish origin. She mentions how the anti-Jewish policies were implemented to increase Hitler’s authority and facilitate the build-up to WWII for his ‘Final Solution’. and she believes it is in this book that he consecrated his ideology to destroy the Jews. stated fully in Mein Kampf from which she has taken her first sentence in the source..would not have been in vain. Germany was in a pitiful state with growing hyperinflation. stating that the hatred of the Jews was at the centre of his mental world. and they furnished the authority for the murder of the Jews in Europe during the Second World War.2 Abigail Green HY3 Coursework Source booklet. homeless and angry at the loss of the war.German dictatorship from 1933 to 1945. which raised unanswered questions about the Holocaust. excerpt from: ‘The war against the Jews’ (1975) Dawidowicz fervently believes that it was solely Hitler who was responsible for the Holocaust. the charismatic political leader. she states that the Holocaust wouldn’t have happened had Hitler not existed. with major events having taken place such as the Adolf Eichmann trials in May 1960 and the construction of the Berlin wall in August 1961. and humiliation from the Treaty of Versailles. Also. Written in 1975. The Final Solution grew out of a matrix formed by traditional anti-Semitism. It is true that after World War One.. Obedience is commended as a virtue’ [1]..” Did the idea of the Final Solution originate in this passage. driving his future political ambitions for Germany.

so would not have been shocking or controversial when published. Adolf Hitler. but only the hard „either-or‟. With the Jew. marginal phenomenon on the political scene’ [2]. If we had at the beginning of. It constituted nothing more than a tiny.3 Abigail Green HY3 Coursework One source that Dawidowicz relies on (functionalists would argue too much) is Mein Kampf. the NSDAP attempted a coup d’état against the Weimar government in a bid to gain power but were unsuccessful. resulting in prison sentences for the perpetrators. Hitler’s biography. Mit dem Juden gibt es kein Paktieren. if the Jews had been killed in the war instead of ‘pure’ Germans. and we can see that he is aware that war is a perfect situation for enabling ‘Untermenschen’ to be disposed of. and during the war. The source is strongly in favour of the intentionalist view at face value.destroy something that cannot be replaced in this world. and functionalists would say that this meant that Hitler was simply ranting in order to vent his frustration. This. especially today: Jewry. there is no coming to terms. 1925 In this part of Mein Kampf. They may also argue that there is no assurance in Hitler’s writing that his aim is to eradicate the Jews. calling them ‘parasites’ and ‘violators of young girls’. that he would turn the German population into willing anti-Semites in readiness for a war of racial purity. sonderen nur das harte Entweder-Oder. He also accuses German citizens of being blind to the Jewish ‘contamination’ of pure Germans. . In November 1923. including Hitler.. This contamination of our blood…. and it is used to support her idea that Hitler had culminated a plan during his time in prison in 1925. in the context of the period. would have been a common idea as anti-Semitism was a prevalent belief at the time. This applies foremost to that people under whose „parasiteness‟ all honourable humanity must suffer..victims of the front would not have been in vain. The language that he uses is also indicative of his pure loathing of the Jewish race. Source Booklet – Document 1. He even mentions the use of poison gas. only that he dislikes them and ‘wishes’ death upon them. This supports Dawidowicz’s theory that Hitler knew his future aim indefinitely. Ian Kershaw stresses that it’s ‘sometimes difficult to keep in mind just How insignificant the Hitlerian movement was during those years [prior to 1928]. the words in Mein Kampf are those of a man who is very bitter towards the world at this point having failed at the Munich Putsch. Hitler‟s View on the Jews.. Hitler discusses how.. which creates speculation that this plan had prevailed from this point until 1942. inconsequential.. This extract gives a full insight into the mind of Hitler in 1925. From Mein Kampf. the loss of life would have been irrelevant due to the Jews being ‘parasites’. However.

Extreme intentionalists such as Dawidowicz would look at this source and see clear early intentions of eliminating Jewry from Germany. persecution and expulsion in order to create his Reich of the Aryan race. Hitler had gained a powerful position within the party a year before. and so the NSDAP would not have wanted to show their extremist ideologies to the public eye before they were in government as they wished to gain supporters to strengthen their party. named the 25-Point Programme. Only those who are our fellow countrymen can become citizens. 7. 1920 4. Only those who have German blood. rather that he intends to follow a path of segregation. Hitler and other NSDAP members had stated their wishes for excluding the Jews in the 25-Point Programme in 1920. Intentionalists may then call functionalists naïve for taking this source at face value. Hitler never suggests any physical violence against Jews or other ‘aliens’ within these points. it is worth noting that this programme was created only two years after the end of WWI. this implies that the NSDAP may have been copying the Austrian Party ideologies. We demand that the State shall above all undertake to ensure that every citizen shall have the possibility of living decently and earning a livelihood. then aliens (non-citizens) must be expelled from the Reich. If it should not be possible to feed the whole population. This programme closely resembles an earlier counterpart from the Austrian DNSAP in 1918. Prior to Mein Kampf. The points state clearly that Jews were to be excluded from citizenship in Germany. or whether the party and Austrian policies catalysed the expansion of his hatred. can be our countrymen. not enemies against it. a functionalist would point out that. when the programme was a type of propaganda in itself and was meant to appeal to the public. .4 Abigail Green HY3 Coursework Own Source 25-Point Programme of the NSDAP. However. meaning it would be very fresh in public minds. thus supporting the functionalist side of the debate in questioning whether Hitler was a radical before he joined the party. hence no Jew can be a countryman. and here we can see that he is already attempting to expand the already extreme ideologies within the party. meaning that they had no rights and that they and other non-citizens should be the first to be expelled from the country if there was a national crisis. similar to Mein Kampf. regardless of creed. Because the gap between the creation of these documents is only two years. Again.

By this point he had been integrated into the NSDAP as their best orator and had planned with the party leaders the points for their programme. It is clear from his assumptions that Kershaw probably gained his evidence from the 25-Point Programme and Mein Kampf to make a judgement. 2005 This secondary evidence from Kershaw focuses on Hitler’s introduction to German politics from 1918-19. as he repeatedly said. This favours an intentionalists view like Dawidowicz’s as despite how early Hitler begins to talk about his plans for ‘restoring Germany’s greatness’. and Kershaw sums up Hitler’s main aims into two goals. . creating a synthesis between them and deducing a far more realistic interpretation of the Holocaust than the former schools.5 Abigail Green HY3 Coursework Some historians fit neither into intentionalism nor functionalism as they look at sources favoured by the schools. that from the beginning of his „career‟ in 1919. Hitler could have possibly followed a decisive path that he believed would lead Germany into another great war. which would end in the destruction of the Jewish race in Germany. The goals could only be attained. These modern contemporaries include figures such as Ian Kershaw. Hitler’s role in the ‘Final Solution’. that is. while Hitler was the driving force behind many of the operations. According to an interview with Dr Havi Dreifuss for Yad Vashem [3]. having recently experienced WWI on the front line. just after WWI. Their basic theory of the Holocaust involves the power struggle between powerful Nazis creating pressures from above and below the state. it was a world war that would equate to the elimination of the Jews. Kershaw believed that it was only when the USA entered the war in December 1941 that Hitler referred it as being a world war. Hitler fanatically pursued two interlinked goals: to restore Germany‟s greatness. and according to his January 1939 prophecy speech. by war. Yehuda Bauer and Michael Marrus. „by the sword‟. and in doing so to avenge and make good the disgrace of the capitulation in 1918. punishing those responsible for the revolution that followed and the national humiliation that was fully revealed in the Treaty of Versailles of 1919. the most important statement being how he relates ‘by the sword’ to the meaning of war. that another world war would be the only way to annihilate the Jews and other enemies. Own Source It was wholly consistent. This knowledge suggests to me that from 1918 until 1941. then. the plan for attaining his goals ‘by the sword’ were at the centre of his ideologies from 1918-1939. Hitler undoubtedly realised. an essay by Ian Kershaw.

the German oak will flourish once more. Germany was consorting with the . Dawidowicz may believe that Hitler’s view was that in consorting with these countries. the Weimar strengthened it’s ‘call for peace’ by entering the League of Nations. were believed to pick off scraps that people left around and took advantage of anything they could. Der Sturmer Caption: “When the vermin are dead. especially Britain and France. Own source 3. and this evidence would be advantageous to an intentionalist historian as it depicts metaphorical killing of the Jews in order to allow Germany to become a great global power again. Argentina and the USA. were run in powerful areas of government and banking by Jews. rallies in Bier Halls and created their own racist magazine ‘Der Sturmer’ in 1923 with Julius Streicher as head editor.6 Abigail Green HY3 Coursework The NSDAP became very proactive when Hitler joined as they held speeches. often represented as rats by the Nazis. The method of killing depicted is by gas.” (December 1927) (photo 1) The cartoon depicts a Nazi man gassing a rat ridden ‘German tree’ in order to allow it to ‘flourish once more’. Britain. and the Weimar Republic. The Jews. the Locarno treaty was signed between Italy. France. linking to what Hitler stated should have been used to kill the Jews in Mein Kampf. The date 1927 is significant as two years before. I believe these two moves may have upset Hitler due to his theory that the Western countries. in an attempt to spread their ideologies throughout Germany. Brazil. The magazine was also distributed in Canada. namely the German people (hiding in the ‘German’ tree). Belgium. rearranging the European borders as a post-war territorial settlement and a year later.

and later the Enabling act which gave him complete control over German law making. to begin his campaign against ‘enemies of the state’ including communists and by historical relation. This source exemplifies what Hitler used that power for. The boycott of Jewish businesses in April 1933 erupted in . This accusation allowed Hitler to enforce article 48. The use of harsh language in the source consequently portrays the Western Jewish ‘vermin’ as the fault in stripping Germany of her power. 1933. supporting Dawidowicz’s view that he had a long held plan. and the Nazi party took the opportunity to blame the incident on Communists and Jews. so is possibly not completely truthful or reliable in portraying the intentions of the NSDAP at the time. and how the Western countries should not go unpunished for their crimes against Germany. Jews. the Reichstag building was set on fire. April 1st 1933. This would also have reinforced his belief that the Jews/countries had to be dealt with in the near future.7 Abigail Green HY3 Coursework unequivocal enemy. Berlin. A photo of an SA member holding a poster reading „Resist! Do not buy from Jews!‟ from the Jewish shop boycott. We know from hindsight that the Nazis didn’t immediately use violence towards the Jews. This source is strong propaganda and aims to show very controversial and shocking images in order to keep readers hooked. On February 27th. which greatly angered him. however they did put in place regulations and prohibitions aimed at singling out the Jews and making a mockery of them.

published 2004 . this would be proof that Hitler was a reactionary character to provocative stimuli. And in the case of the war that Hitler both intended and prophesised in January 1939 (thus setting a new level of expectation for his followers). which led in turn the cumulative radicalisation (a term coined by Hans Mommsen) of Final Solutions that shaped the Holocaust. especially the upper class aristocracy in order to gain their trust. Hitler did not have to devise a blueprint. From the view of a functionalist like Christopher Browning. allowing other people to concentrate on the task of liquidating the Jews and this is especially prevalent in the sentence ‘Goring announced on Hitler’s behalf’ after Kristellnacht. In Browning’s description. As Goring announced on Hitler‟s behalf following Kristellnacht pogrom in November 1938. an acceptable Final Solution would result in “the destruction of the Jewish race in Europe”. he wouldn’t have reacted by announcing his own boycott. September 1939 – March 1942 The source explains that Hitler was merely the person who threw about ideas and prophecies about the ‘Jewish question’ while his followers became the main fabricators of solutions. in this case the US boycott. but would have reacted in a more violent fashion as seen 5 years later with the Pogrom of Kristellnacht. He merely had to proclaim its continuing existence and reward those who vied in bringing forth various solutions. I believe however that Hitler having only recently come into power wished to appeal to the voting public. Christopher Browning (functionalist). indicating that Hitler wasn’t at the forefront of Jewish related violence. Given the dynamics of the Nazi political system. and not that he had a set plan to abuse and annihilate the Jews for his own gain. Thus the combination of Hitler‟s anti-Semitism as ideological imperative and the competitive poylcracy of the Nazi regime created immense pressures for the escalation of Nazi Jewish policy even without broad public support in that direction. Own Source. In the end “Final Solutions” would become the only ones worthy of submission to Hitler. meaning that he would not have carried out any radical policies at this point. Within the polycratic regime.8 Abigail Green HY3 Coursework retaliation to the anti-Nazi Jewish boycott in America one month earlier. and involved SA members prohibiting entrance to Jewish businesses. Hitler had relinquished all control in the areas of Jewish foreign policy. timetable or grand design for solving the “Jewish question”.the Origins of the Final Solution: the Evolution of Nazi Jewish Policy. a ratchet-like decision making process permitted bursts of radicalization periodically alternating with tactical pauses but never moderation or retreat. . Christopher Browning is a moderate functionalist who believes that the rivalry within the Nazi Government between powerful figures including Hitler caused an unstable and imbalanced power structure. the “Jewish question” had to be solved “one way or another”. Browning may argue that if Hitler truly had a set plan to start a war and destroy all Jews.

. Browning’s book was written after these events therefore we can determine that he had richer variety of evidence to base his interpretation of the Holocaust on than Dawidowicz would have.’[4] relating to the decrees expropriating all Jewish assets following the Pogrom. Historians who took part included Mommsen. One thing that is certain about Kristellnacht. Broszat. including whether the Nazi crimes were unique or comparable with Stalinist Russia and if other Genocides were comparable to the Holocaust. undermining public safety. It is believed that Goebbels had fallen out of favour with Hitler due to personal reasons and so this pogrom was possibly a ploy on Goebbels’ part to return to favour. it is suggested that Hitler played no part in the planning or executing of the pogrom as it had been instigated by Joseph Goebbels whose speech on 9th November 1938 roused the ranks of the Hitler Youth and SS to wreak havoc on Jews in Germany. as he was born of American origin a year before the war’s end. Schulze and Kershaw. social and political into that of physical violence.9 Abigail Green HY3 Coursework In the case of Kristellnacht. but his other officials Goering. in the late 1980’s which pitted right wing against left wing intellectuals on the controversial topic of the crimes of Nazi Germany. Browning would see this as proof that the Nazi state was very unpredictable and uncoordinated. is that it was a major turning point in Nazi Germany as it turned the persecution from economic. The reliability of Browning’s work also appears strengthened by his lack of personal connection with the Holocaust. The debate ended in the year that the notorious Berlin wall came down in 1989. After the opening of East Germany to the rest of the world. Himmler and Heydrich were weary because it caused a threat of disrupting the economy and riots were likely to run out of control. an intellectual debate in West Germany. due to increasing radical political unrest in the Eastern Soviet-run countries. he is said to have jumped up and down with glee. When Hitler heard of the event. with Hitler at complete idealistic odds with the other pragmatic Nazis. and was taught by Professors who were not particularly functionalist or intentionalist. new evidence from the Holocaust came to light for the first time since WWII. ‘The Origins of the Final Solution: Evolution of Nazi Jewish policy’ was published in 2004 after the Historikerstreit. however according to Dawidowicz it was ‘exploited by the government to accelerate the expropriation of Jews and the liquidation of their community.

but also that this act of ‘generosity’ can be used as propaganda for the Nazis to show to Germany and the rest of the world how kind a government they are. It states how Referat D III suggests the Jews should be exported to Madagascar to take the place of the small French colony living there. open to discussion and implementation. The possibility that Nazis could use their ‘accomplishment’ in moving the Jews for propaganda shows that the plan was a serious consideration. and so the Jews would have perished even if they had made it to Madagascar. as Britain gained control of the seas.10 Abigail Green HY3 Coursework Source Booklet – Document 8. outlining the so-called ‘Madagascar Plan’. it was only Germany’s loss at the battle of Britain in 1940. The portion of the island not needed form military purposes will be placed under administration of the German police governor.. The island will be transferred to Germany as a mandate. which was inhabited by around 3. and even if they had.The Jews will be jointly liable for the value of the island.. This supports the functionalist assessment as it shows that certain circumstances of the war were to blame for the Holocaust. However.. In Poland. the Madagascar plan may not have been intended to be ‘generous’. Although to intentionalists Kristellnacht is the beginning of the violent struggle of Jewish extermination. especially as other occurrences such as the invasion of Poland in 1939.For this they must still prove themselves to history. Also. the plan was to build Ghettos and concentration camps to store the Jews in while they considered the next move in their plan. From a memorandum sent by Adolf Eichmann to Rademacher of the Foreign Office. 15th August 1940. this source is contradictory because the Memorandum sent by Adolf Eichmann to the official Franz Rademacher outlines a plan of forcibly deporting the Jews to Madagascar. The Madagascar plan is seen by Browning to mean that the Nazis were still looking for ways in which to force the Jews out of Europe so they wouldn’t interfere with the quest for the German Volksgemeinschaft. to live in seclusion and own half the island. There is also the argument that the Nazis had counted on the Jews not reaching Madagascar as they may have thought they wouldn’t survive the journey...5 million Jews. which prevented the plan from coming to fruition. Referat D III suggests a solution to the Jewish question: in the peace treaty….. Dawidowicz believes the plan to be a cover up for the Nazis true intentions of carrying out mass murder. caused the Nazis to panic as they had to devise a way in which to deal with the new influx of Jews. We can utilize for propaganda purposes the generosity which Germany shows the Jew…. which at this point had been deportation to Madagascar.000 people inhabited the island tells me that the environment was very harsh. . the fact that only 20.

as the transportation and maintenance of Jews would have been costly. Here they discussed the ultimatum of the ‘Final Solution’. He wants. under all circumstances. called together a meeting in January with governmental representatives and a few SS Nazis in the ‘Wannsee Conference’. The procedure is a pretty barbaric one and not to be described here more definitely.. On the whole it can be said that about 60 per cent of them will have to be liquidated whereas only about 40 per cent can be used for forced labor. They will have to be concentrated later. and by April. possibly an island.000. Joseph Goebbels' Diaries: Excerpts. His attitude is unrelenting. to push the Jews out of Europe. April 27. however Goebbels’ view escalates in the following 20 days when they are being ‘evacuated’ to Poland. to begin with. dredging money from the economy. shooting huge numbers of citizens en mass if they were ‘Untemenchen’. 1942 (pp.11 Abigail Green HY3 Coursework Two years after this memorandum was written. March 27. the Jews in the General Government are now being evacuated eastward.000 Jews still in Europe. Heydrich. head of the SD.. which involved the deportation or extermination of all Jews in Nazi-occupied countries. Although it is believed that this meeting resulted in the Final Solution. 147-148) Beginning with Lublin. Goebbels explains that even the severest punishment is too mild for the Jews. such as Madagascar. 190-191) I talked to the Fuehrer once more in detail about the Jewish question.. This theory relates to the Jewish situation. The Jewish question must be solved within a pan-European frame. Own Source. This attitude change is possibly due to how in 1942 Polish camps were becoming inundated with Jews. 115-116) I read a detailed report from the SD and police regarding a Final Solution of the Jewish question. forced migration was still an option as shown in Goebbels’ diaries. can be assigned to them after the war. The first victims were ‘mental’ patients in Polish camps and to an historian like Kershaw this would show how the Nazis aim wasn’t simply to kill the Jews in a chaotic fashion. The Jews have brought so much misery to our continent that the severest punishment meted out to them is still too mild. I believe this a reason why the Final Solution became . The Einsatzgruppen (under Heydrich) were also already in operation in Poland and Russia. in the East. historians realise that there were no high-ranking Nazis present except Heydrich. March 7. 1942 (pp. but to be pragmatic in relieving pressure on the economy through expensive services that looked after people who were ‘a burden on the state’. A solution had arisen however through Gas Vans. where he states in March that the Jews must be concentrated in the East. 1942 (pp. Any Final Solution involves a tremendous number of new viewpoints. 1942-43 Functionalists like Browning would see that in 1942. Not much will remain of the Jews. That is right. There are 11. commissioned in 1940 as part of the T4 project. and from the date in Goebbels’ diaries we see that he received an expurgated version only much later. In any case there can be no peace in Europe until the last Jews are eliminated from the continent.

as Jews were currently being killed en masse in the new Polish extermination camps by the SS. bringing new ideas and questions to a fresh generation of historians. Goebbels’ diaries were originally discovered by the Soviets in Potsdam in 1945 and were shipped to Moscow where they lay for the next 47 years until discovered by a German historian. This meant that prior to their discovery. the functionalist-intentionalist debate will carry on far into the future. or possibly will ever be found.12 Abigail Green HY3 Coursework one of complete liquidation rather than forced migration. and the diaries may have brought new evidence to support or refute claims which previously couldn’t be proved. This shows that certain circumstances of the war were to blame for the escalation of the Holocaust. especially considering the gradual change in attitude that has occurred through attempting to explain the Holocaust instead of simply finding people to blame. views of historians may have been different regarding the role of Goebbels. Dawidowicz however would interpret ‘concentrated in the East’ as meaning to be killed. especially as no document has been found. but were not the main reasons for its implementation. This would have made the Nazis impatient for the Jews to be disposed of before the Russians marched on Poland and liberated the camps. without access to this evidence would become less reliable. meaning that the interpretations of older historians such as Dawidowicz. however each explanation has its own flaws. I am more inclined towards the interpretations of synthesis historians such as Ian Kershaw because I believe that we have to look at both sides of the argument for whether there was a straight or quasi-chaotic path to genocide. Word count = 3998 . Pressure from the East also began escalating by 1942 as operation Barbarossa had failed and the Germans were being pushed out of Russia. There is still much to be debated. Because of this. The debate between the schools of functionalism and intentionalism produce convincing interpretations of the path that Hitler and the Nazis followed in executing the Holocaust. that states Hitler to be the one who held the ‘smoking gun’ at the Jews.

html . line 5]  [4] Edited by Lucy Dawidowicz. page 49 (2008)  NSDAP. the Germans and the Final Solution’.youtube. Source packdocument 9. http://www.  [1] The trail of Adolf Eichmann: In his own words.  Joseph Goebbels’ Diaries March 7th. ‘The origins of the Final Solution: The evolution of Nazi Jewish Policy.remember. excerpt from ‘The war against the Jews’ (1975).calvin.org/eichmann/ownwords. Der Sturmer. http://www.13 Abigail Green HY3 Coursework Bibliography  Lucy Dawidowicz. Yad Vashem. [Page 10. p37 (1976)  Memorandum sent by Adolf Eichmann to Rademacher of the Foreign office.org/hweb/people/g/goebbels-joseph/goebbels1948-excerpts-02. http://forum.org/posterity/ns/25pts.’ (1927) http://www. 27th and April 27th 1942. Paragraph 4.com/viewtopic.stormfront.axishistory. ‘When the vermin are dead. Source pack-document 1  [2] Ian Kershaw. ‘Mein Kampf’ (1925). 25 point programme (1920). Source pack-document 8.com/watch?v=SQJ--ojdJVs  Photo 1. [Page 10-11. http://www. September 1939-March 1942’ (2004). ‘A Holocaust Reader’. (complete version published 2004).htm  Adolf Hitler.html  Ian Kershaw.php?f=44&t=141131  Christopher Browning. http://www. outlining the so-called ‘Madagascar plan’. The development of the Final Solution. 15th August 1940. ‘Hitler’s role in the Final Solution’ (2005).edu/academic/cas/gpa/sturm28.htm  Photo 2. the German Oak will flourish once more. SA members holding a poster reading ‘Resist! Do not buy from the Jews!’ Berlin (April 1st 1933).nizkor. ‘Hitler. paragraph 2]  [3] Dr Havi Dreifuss.