The Rise And Fall Of The Third Reich

[DATo]

The Rise And Fall Of The Third Reich by William Shirer

I had heard of this nonfiction, Pulitzer Prize winning book for ages but dismissed it because I thought it would be very pedantically written. Instead, I found it to be one of the most readable historical accounts I have ever undertaken. It is long - two volumes - the first, as would be expected, dealt with the rise of Hitler beginning with his childhood (actually, with his family genealogy before he was even born), and ending with his rise to the pinnacle of power. The second volume dealt with the slow reversal of the successes that the German army initially made to its final defeat paralleled with what was taking place at the same time in the life of Hitler and his associates back in Berlin. The book was extremely detailed and offered many, many side stories about the man and those around him from when he was a child until his death which were utterly fascinating.

I found the chapters dealing with Hitler's childhood to be among the most interesting. One could see, even at this early time in his life, the characteristics which would later, in their full maturity, wreak havoc upon the world.

This book is a must for anyone interested in WW II, or how and why 'Hitler' became the most distasteful word in all of the languages of the world.

Edited to add : As I was reading this book it slowly began to occur to me that time and time again, from the moment Hitler was born until he reached his most powerful status, that without fail, virtually EVERYTHING he did, even when the odds were against success, went his way. I do not believe in a Devil or Hell but I had the most eerie felling as I read the first volume that some unseen malevolent hand was guiding his destiny.

 

[Răspunsul]

It sounds fascinating, how are you getting on with it? Have you read the whole thing?

 

[DATo]

It sounds fascinating, how are you getting on with it? Have you read the whole thing?

I read it some time ago. After a recent discussion with sparkchaser about the book The Guns Of August I began recounting some of the books about war I have read and this one came to mind the other day on my drive to work, though this is less a book about war than a biography of Adolph Hitler. I thought I'd post a description along with my recommendation to the board.

The Rise And Fall Of The Third Reich is an amazingly detailed book. Most of us know the basics about Hitler but this book goes into the smallest details involving his day-to-day life, childhood aspirations, his relationship with his father etc

There was one story I found particularly interesting which involved one of his early teachers. Hitler was born in Austria near the German border. He was a terrible student, not because he was necessarily stupid but because he refused to bow to authority and do his lessons. There was one teacher though who he idolized. This teacher taught history and would lecture at length about the Aryan race and its superiority over other cultures. He talked about how the Germanic tribes defeated the Roman legions and the glory of the Teutonic Knights. Hitler would listen in rapt fascination to this man and many years later when Hitler was Chancellor of Germany he had this man brought to Berlin to wine and dine him. When the former teacher was leaving Hitler turned to one of his associates and said, "Everything I am and everything I have become I owe to that old man." This story is something which should be taught as an object lesson to every aspiring teacher - i.e. the enormous impact a teacher can have, for good or evil, on a young mind. This was one of the incidents I mentioned in my OP regarding how history could have been changed - if this teacher had taught about the evils of war; about the advantages of nations cooperating with each other; of benevolence to minorities, instead, the seeds of racial superiority, war, and terror were sown in their stead. It is arguable that this one teacher, Leopold Poetsch, had the most enormous and devastating impact on human history of any teacher ever born.

This is only one of an enormous number of anecdotal stories to be found in this book.

 

[Răspunsul]

Great stuff Dato, thanks.
I liked it.
When I got to the point about teachers affecting students though; I do not personally agree with that.
You know how they say 'genuis will out'?
I think evil will out too.
I think if Mother Teresa had been Adolph's teacher, he still would have been a bad 'un.
What's you personal feeling?
To throw something else into the mix too; Hitler was not 'all' bad. Some of his book is quite well reasoned, have you read it?

 

[Meadow337]

Great stuff Dato, thanks.
I liked it.
When I got to the point about teachers affecting students though; I do not personally agree with that.
You know how they say 'genuis will out'?
I think evil will out too.
I think if Mother Teresa had been Adolph's teacher, he still would have been a bad 'un.
What's you personal feeling?
To throw something else into the mix too; Hitler was not 'all' bad. Some of his book is quite well reasoned, have you read it?

Teachers have enormous influence on students and Hitler didn't suck his ideas out of thin air.

 

[Peder]

Just an added comment re scholarship on the subject. Shirer's was one of the earliest books on the subject, if not in fact the earliest.
Since then there have been many new books by serious historians making use of more detailed information that has come available in the years since Shirer's book.
PS I am one who takes issue with the use of the word "genius" applied to Hitler. I do not believe there is any approving word in the language that should be applied to him. To me he is incarnate Evil, one of the best examples I know that Evil does exist as a force in the world.

 

[Roxbrough]

Just an added comment re scholarship on the subject. Shirer's was one of the earliest books on the subject, if not in fact the earliest.
Since then there have been many new books by serious historians making use of more detailed information that has come available in the years since Shirer's book.
PS I am one who takes issue with the use of the word "genius" applied to Hitler. I do not believe there is any approving word in the language that should be applied to him. To me he is incarnate Evil, one of the best examples I know that Evil does exist as a force in the world.

Do you know who these books are by, I have an interest in military history?
Regarding your point about use of the word genius, it is not always used in a positive way.
For example; Caesar was a military genius, as was Napolean, but they were both quite insane also. Maybe the addage, "Genius and Insanity are two sides of the same coin apply here?
What Hitler did was certainly depraved and malign, but he also took a broken and bankrupt country in 1932 and in seven years turned it into the most powerful industrial might the world had ever seen up until that point. To do that he was obviously no slouch.
I am not disagreeing with you, just suggesting a different slant to the comment.

 

[Peder]

Do you know who these books are by, I have an interest in military history?
Regarding your point about use of the word genius, it is not always used in a positive way.
For example; Caesar was a military genius, as was Napolean, but they were both quite insane also. Maybe the addage, "Genius and Insanity are two sides of the same coin apply here?
What Hitler did was certainly depraved and malign, but he also took a broken and bankrupt country in 1932 and in seven years turned it into the most powerful industrial might the world had ever seen up until that point. To do that he was obviously no slouch.
I am not disagreeing with you, just suggesting a different slant to the comment.

Roxbrough, I was especially thinking of Ian Kershaw and Richard J. Evans. although (many) other authors have also written, including William Manchester, John Toland, Alan Bullock and Werner Maser.

I am disagreeing with you. I feel calling insane and depraved political or military leaders geniuses debases the English language. It was no genius who brought us The Holocaust. Hitler should be remembered only in infamy, if at all, and only in the most despicable terms. To have created a mighty war machine is at best a dubious honor and far from unique in the history of the world, it seems to me.

Sorry, but I don't accept apologies for Hitler. I have seen the period and I remember it.

 

[pontalba]

For example; Caesar was a military genius, as was Napolean, but they were both quite insane also. Maybe the addage, "Genius and Insanity are two sides of the same coin apply here?

Napoleon may have been neurotic as the day is long, that doesn't qualify the term insanity. As far as Julius Caesar, he was a lot of things, a great military commander and leader, charismatic, ruthless, and practical to a fault. Not insane.

 

[Roxbrough]

Roxbrough, I was especially thinking of Ian Kershaw and Richard J. Evans. although (many) other authors have also written, including William Manchester, John Toland, Alan Bullock and Werner Maser.

I am disagreeing with you. I feel calling insane and depraved political or military leaders geniuses debases the English language.

Thanks for the info on the authors.
You make me smile with the rest of your message. You disagree with me, for agreeing with you!!!?
The word genius means to inspire in others and can just as easily be used to describe evil as good.
Hitler was an inspiration to millions of German people. The fact that he used his genius to perpetrate evil does not detract from the fact that he possessed the quality.
It is an Italian word, not English.
So yes you are right, Hitler was a evil man, he was though an evil genius!

Napoleon may have been neurotic as the day is long, that doesn't qualify the term insanity. As far as Julius Caesar, he was a lot of things, a great military commander and leader, charismatic, ruthless, and practical to a fault. Not insane.

Napolean caused the death of millions, in my book that is the work of an insane person.
Caesar was so mad he thought himself a god and the senate had to assassinate him, in order to save the empire.
Both men were geniuses when it came to the deployment of troops, but they were both quite mad.

 

[pontalba]

Napolean caused the death of millions, in my book that is the work of an insane person.
Caesar was so mad he thought himself a god and the senate had to assassinate him, in order to save the empire.
Both men were geniuses when it came to the deployment of troops, but they were both quite mad.

Caesar did not think he was a god, he was "elected" to "goddom" after he was assassinated. Of course Augustus kept up the practice. What better way to control the mob?

Both greedy men. Conquering and acquiring land and riches for their country does not an insane person make.

 

[Roxbrough]

"The Rise And Fall Of The Third Reich by William Shirer"

Dato look at all the trouble you've caused! Ha ha ha ha.

 

[Peder]

Thanks for the info on the authors.
You make me smile with the rest of your message. You disagree with me, for agreeing with you!!!?
The word genius means to inspire in others and can just as easily be used to describe evil as good.
Hitler was an inspiration to millions of German people. The fact that he used his genius to perpetrate evil does not detract from the fact that he possessed the quality.
It is an Italian word, not English.
So yes you are right, Hitler was a evil man, he was though an evil genius!

Clearly you know a lot more than I do. I defer.

 

[Roxbrough]

Conquering and acquiring land and riches for their country does not an insane person make.

Having taken part in wars personally, and seen young men die hideously and in agony, my personal feeling is that to deliberately pursue it, equates to insanity.
You are entitled to your opinion, the men died for your right, to it.

Clearly you know a lot more than I do. I defer.

I greatly respect you for that.
This is one of the functions of a forum, to air our views.
It would not be a very interesting site if we all thought the same.

 

[pontalba]

Having taken part in wars personally, and seen young men die hideously and in agony, my personal feeling is that to deliberately pursue it, equates to insanity.
You are entitled to your opinion, the men died for your right to it.

Oh, believe me.....I'm not disputing the horrifying facts of war, I've lived through enough of it. However, I dispute the term "insanity" being applied to those that run the show.

 

[DATo]

"The Rise And Fall Of The Third Reich by William Shirer"

Dato look at all the trouble you've caused! Ha ha ha ha.

Yup !!! If I had know that I would have kept my mouth shut *LOL* Rise & Fall is still a great book. Recommend it highly.

 

[Meadow337]

Yup !!! If I had know that I would have kept my mouth shut *LOL* Rise & Fall is still a great book. Recommend it highly.

Naah this is a good discussion

 

[Răspunsul]

Oh, believe me.....I'm not disputing the horrifying facts of war, I've lived through enough of it. However, I dispute the term "insanity" being applied to those that run the show.

As war itself is an insanity, it is very reasonable to assume that anyone who perpetrates it must be unhinged.
WWI saw the needless slaughter of 40 million!
40 million!
Toward the end, the Generals were still ordering the youth of their nations, 'over the top' straight into the face of machine guns and poisonous gas. To do that is not the actions of someone totally sane.
Even when all the slaughter was over, the allies drew up a treat of Versailles that was so unreasonable and crippling to Germany that it caused WWII!
Insanity throughout.

In my personal opinion of course..x

 

[DATo]

As war itself is an insanity, it is very reasonable to assume that anyone who perpetrates it must be unhinged.
WWI saw the needless slaughter of 40 million!
40 million!
Toward the end, the Generals were still ordering the youth of their nations, 'over the top' straight into the face of machine guns and poisonous gas. To do that is not the actions of someone totally sane.
Even when all the slaughter was over, the allies drew up a treat of Versailles that was so unreasonable and crippling to Germany that it caused WWII!
Insanity throughout.

In my personal opinion of course..x

I think what many perceive as the excessive reparation components of The Treaty Of Versailles opens a complicated issue. The animosity between France and Germany long predates the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand. Most recent to this conflict (WWI) was the calculated contrivance of the Franco Prussian War of 1870 by Otto von Bismarck, which led to the humiliating defeat of France in less than a year. The terms of armistice included enormous monetary reparations as well as territorial concessions. If that wasn't enough, the Germans demanded to march the German army down the Champs-E'lyse'es in Paris in a victory parade which added unnecessarily to the French humiliation. When the tables were turned at Versailles, after yet another invasion by Germany, an invasion which ignored the treaty signed by England, Germany, Russia and France to not violate Belgian soil, the long bottled up French hatred knew no bounds.

The important thing to remember is that WW I was fought almost entirely on French soil. The German nation, though suffering from serious deprivation of food and other commodities at home as a result of a war which they thought would be won as easily as the war of 1870, was otherwise unscathed. The French had lost enormous amounts of farmland which had been turned into a quagmire of mud peppered with probably millions of craters resulting from exploded bombs to say nothing of the UNexploded bombs which would continue to kill Frenchmen for decades to come. I was told once long ago that in the calculation of the amount of German reparation an estimate was made (and included in the Versailles treaty) of every tree destroyed in France by Germany during the war.

One can hardly blame the French for their attitude in light of previous history but you are correct in my opinion. The excesses of the Treaty Of Versailles certainly contributed to the rise of Hitler. It was the number one topic on his list of rants.

Naah this is a good discussion

Thank you for your support *Bows*

 

[pontalba]

I think what many perceive as the excessive reparation components of The Treaty Of Versailles opens a complicated issue. The animosity between France and Germany long predates the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand. Most recent to this conflict (WWI) was the calculated contrivance of the Franco Prussian War of 1870 by Otto von Bismarck, which led to the humiliating defeat of France in less than a year. The terms of armistice included enormous monetary reparations as well as territorial concessions. If that wasn't enough, the Germans demanded to march the German army down the Champs-E'lyse'es in Paris in a victory parade which added unnecessarily to the French humiliation. When the tables were turned at Versailles, after yet another invasion by Germany, an invasion which ignored the treaty signed by England, Germany, Russia and France to not violate Belgian soil, the long bottled up French hatred knew no bounds.

The important thing to remember is that WW I was fought almost entirely on French soil. The German nation, though suffering from serious deprivation of food and other commodities at home as a result of a war which they thought would be won as easily as the war of 1870, was otherwise unscathed. The French had lost enormous amounts of farmland which had been turned into a quagmire of mud peppered with probably millions of craters resulting from exploded bombs to say nothing of the UNexploded bombs which would continue to kill Frenchmen for decades to come. I was told once long ago that in the calculation of the amount of German reparation an estimate was made (and included in the Versailles treaty) of every tree destroyed in France by Germany during the war.

One can hardly blame the French for their attitude in light of previous history but you are correct in my opinion. The excesses of the Treaty Of Versailles certainly contributed to the rise of Hitler. It was the number one topic on his list of rants.



Thank you for your support *Bows*

Funny how no one learns from the past. Not surprising, just ironic. Just keep on repeating it.