Peter Fritzsche’s Life and Death in the Third Reich gives personalized accounts of the Nazis’ different approaches, rationales, and justifications for their actions in their relationship with the German people between 1933 and 1945. Rather than blaming the German citizens for allowing Nazi ideology, he focuses on the complex relationship between the German population and the Nazis. He argues that it was the broad German desire for a Volksgemeinschaft, which was not a new or imposed idea, and the Nazi's deliverance of it that enabled the Nazi regime to win popular support. Fritzsche demonstrates German reactions to Nazi decisions through diaries, letters, and journals. These first-hand documents raise broader questions about how political pressure encroaches on people and conform to public opinion to bend to the desires of the few. Fritzsche uses only written accounts rather than providing photo evidence to make this more effective on the reader through narrative coherence.
Firstly, Fritzsche uses the first section of the book to explain and analyze the Volksgemeinschaft using a variety of first-hand accounts that show a wide range of feelings towards the Nazi regime. The Volksgemeinschaft is the German expression meaning people’s community. He reveals in this section called “Reviving the Nation” how the German population slowly began to conform to Nazi ideals through the idea of Volksgemeinschaft. The Nazis created a false sense of community through their ideology. Fritzsche uses three different narratives to show the range of acceptance of the Nazis’ ideology: one embraces the Nazi regime fully, one resists it, and the last one conforms to it. Edwin Erich, who was anti-Nazi, becomes captivated by the way that the Nazis were able to promote a community through their ideology. All he wanted was national unity and the Nazi regime was promising this to the German population. He was not the only one, many Germans desired this sense of national unity and community to redress the wrongs of the Versailles treaty that would make the German population and country strong again (Fritzsche 38-39). Fritzsche compares two of these narratives and explains, “Unlike Karl D Dürkefälden, who remained an outsider, at crucial moments, Erich willingly surrendered himself to the embrace of the national community” (35). Fritzsche does not use harsh words that imply blame or that Erich was weak for accepting the Nazis’ ideology. Fritzsche uses words like “surrendered,” “embrace,” and “crucial” to show Erich’s awareness of himself conforming to the Nazis’ ideology and that he was not necessarily a victim. Fritzsche goes on to explain that many Germans conformed out of fear, social pressure, and distrust but here we see that many Germans believed that the Nazis’ ideology would heal German’s past and improve the country (37). This is a prime example of taking an ideal that the majority of a population wants and a political party bending it to fit their ideology that has the population conforming to that party’s belief under empty promises. This kind of approach is very common in today’s politics and the way that Fritzsche phrases these observations makes it easier for a modern audience to understand.
Save your time!
We can take care of your essay
- Proper editing and formatting
- Free revision, title page, and bibliography
- Flexible prices and money-back guarantee
Fritzsche goes on to demonstrate the German’s reactions to the Nazi regime twisting the idea of the Volksgemeinschaft to further develop their desire to separate the Jews from the rest of the community. Firstly, Fritzsche explains how the Nazis took the want for a Volksgemeinschaft and put restrictions on who were considered comrades in this community and who were the enemies (43). They did so by expressing their idea of what the ideal Volksgemeinschaft would look like within films like Triumph of the Will that justified the need for labor service camps to form a people’s community by working together and relaxing together (Fritzsche 101-102). These training camps were fundamental to the Nazis’ racial project. These camps structured the new German person through education of comradeship and bourgeois elements (Fritzsche 98). Through these camps, the Nazi regime was able to subtly create the idea of falling into order through the actions that they had available for these communities like marching around. Many did not realize the sort of military training that was taking place in these communities but rather wanted to fit in. The desire to fit into these communities was strong as Elisabeth Brasch’s brother demonstrates by saying, “people came together before they realized it” and that he “took pride in fitting in” (Fritzsche 103). Here, Fritzsche emphasizes her brother’s pride in being able to fit in. So, as time went on, more and more wanted to fit in as it was something to be proud of to be able to be a part of the strong community. As time continued, and the killing of Jews was more established, Fritz Jacob, a SS soldier, shows how the killing was not easy but he felt that it needed to be done to meet the goals of the German people through Nazism: “We will clear the way without pangs of conscience, and then the world will be at peace” (Fritzsche 202). At first, he talked about how upsetting it was but as time went on, he believed it was for the German people towards building an even stronger community. He emphasizes that all this work would establish “peace.” The German population accepted the Nazis’ ideology because of how they delivered their ideology through the idea of a strong community. As explained by Joseph Goebbels, Hitler’s chief strategist for propaganda, the Nazis emphasized to the German population that since so many bridges had been burned, the only solution was to keep fighting (Fritzsche 265-266). And many followed this ideal since they had built such a community and it was too late to turn back. Throughout the book, Fritzsche is demonstrating how the Nazi regime was able to take a simple idea of Volksgemeinschaft or community, modify it and add elements that slowly got the German population to accept their ideals. This is very common in all politics across the world today. The Nazis took propaganda to a whole different level by manipulating the population with false promises and disguising these promises to fit the Nazis’ ideology.
As shown above, Fritzsche offers these accounts of individuals that struggled with conforming to the Nazis’ ideals in a relaxed and non-accusive tone that helps modern readers relate to a modern political climate. This usage is different from Hobsbawm and Gerwarth, as Fritzsche uses quotes to add narrative coherence and as evidence. Hobsbawm and Gerwarth used a mix of quotes and photos in their texts to emphasize evidence that supported their arguments. Fritzsche goes beyond using these first-hand accounts as evidence but also uses them to connect with his audience, so they can understand why the German population seemed to accept the dynamics established by the Nazi regime. Most of the accounts he provides do not give evidence of a survey of Nazi Germany but rather emphasize the complexity of individual experiences in terms of community and survival. This book provides a very different narrative than what modern audiences are used to blaming the German citizens or seeing them as victims but empathizing with them. Lastly, Fritzsche acknowledges the limitations of his arguments as this subject is so complex that it is not easily or fully explained by himself (307).
Stuck on your essay?
