Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate, I may earn a small commission from qualifying purchases if you use the links listed within this post. Using the following links to purchase any of the books discussed will not add to the cost of the item(s). It’s an excellent way for you to support my continued efforts to provide amazing and free content to you. Thank you!

Hello dear readers -

I am currently working on a book recommendation for the first selection I’d like to feature on my website. This selection was a favorite of mine that I read during my graduate program, and I can’t wait to finish up the review. For now, I thought I’d show you all just how much this particular book caught my attention and interest by featuring the response paper I needed to write for the class.

A little background: the class was a graduate history seminar called “Modernity, Revolutions, and Totalitarianism.” The class was offered by George Mason University’s resident Russian historian, Dr. Steven Barnes. I was blessed to take coursework and, eventually, complete my comprehensive examinations under his brilliant tutelage and guidance. It is because of Dr. Barnes that I have had more confidence in my historical writing and critical thinking skills. The course focused on how the concept and question of modernity (I want you to ask yourself: how can modernity really be defined with regard to time?) can affect the political and social framework of a country.

The book I’m discussing is Sir Ian Kershaw’s work, The ‘Hitler Myth’: Image and Reality in the Third Reich. Kershaw takes the idea that, after the decadent, short-lived period of the failed Weimar Republic, the average German citizen was immediately taken in by the promises of the rising Nazi Party - that this party would be responsible for helping Germany revive itself from the embarrassment and ghost of the despised Treaty of Versailles. The Nazi Party literally started to deify its leader, Adolf Hitler, as a “god” and constructed the idea of cult-building to emphasize his power.

As a result of the party’s cult-building, the Germans were easily manipulated into believing that Hitler was the “god” who would assist them with making Germany a great nation once again. This made it much easier for the party to take over, condemn the Jewish people (and anyone responsible for their economic plight after the Great War), and eventually, implement the “Final Solution.” The work I’m presenting you is a response to Kershaw’s theory of the Hitler “cult.” You’'ll notice references to Italian Fascism and the influence of Catholicism and spirituality. Happy reading! I’ll be posting the actual book review soon:

Ian Kershaw’s The ‘Hitler Myth’ focuses on the “image-building and image reception”[1] of the so-called “Hitler myth” or “cult.” This propaganda motive was necessary to give Germany a leader who seemed to be concerned for the nation’s future. As Hitler enchanted the masses with his public persona and enigmatic charm, the Nazi Party, constantly derided by the public, continued to mold an economically sound Germany, prevent war, and solve the “Jewish Question.” The Hitler cult allowed for these changes to take place; the people may not have agreed with the ideologies and beliefs of the Nazi Party, but because they were so entranced by Hitler himself, kept the party in power until the end of the war. Each chapter shows the development of the cult, how people fervently began to ‘join’ it, and Kershaw argues that not everyone believed in the imagery. He concludes his work with the ‘beginning of the end’ of the cult, right when Germany went to war, and the inevitable demise of the cult when the war ended.

Chapter four, “The Führer versus the Radicals” (roughly 1936-1937), shows how much the cult had evolved from Hitler’s election as Chancellor in 1933, as well as how spirituality presented by Hitler allowed for the public to leave behind the church in favor of the Führer. Kershaw immediately states that Hitler was “basically opposed to Christianity,”[2] but that he desired to create a balanced leadership of secularism and spirituality. As soon as Hitler took power, his speeches showed a shift in tone; they became more “messianic,”[3] as he wanted to help spark an “awakening of the nation”[4] through these seemingly god-like speeches. Kershaw though, says that Hitler, because of his non-belief in Christianity, wanted to portray a spiritually devout leader to the people, as opposed to someone who believed in a structured religious order.

This brings this argument back to Peasants into Frenchmen. Weber’s chapter on the spiritual reawakening of the nation echoed in Kershaw’s chapter. The rigid Catholic Church structure of pre-revolution France became a more interpretive spiritual revival for the people, and this is much like what Hitler is trying to accomplish through his deified speeches. While the Frenchmen in Weber were still “Catholic,” they knew there was more to Catholicism than just the religious, church-attending aspect. There was a spiritual part to Catholicism, much like there is a spirituality present in Hitler’s Germany.

The chapter draws on ‘miracles’ performed by Hitler. The mere sound of his voice and his physical presence, he told his people, were enough to awaken them and unite them as a group to help Germany thrive as a nation. Although there was still a firm belief in “institutionalized religious practices”[5] throughout Germany, Hitler’s speeches took people away from the conformist churches, and allowed them to convert to his “substitute faith”[6] of believing in the nation.

Unlike Eugen Weber in Peasants Into Frenchmen, Kershaw gives the counterargument to Hitler’s new ‘religion.’ Weber does not offer a response from the French Catholic Church about this shift in spirituality. Kershaw, however, portrays the struggle between Hitler and the churches, especially the Catholic ones. There was some support of Hitler by the Catholics because of the Nazis and their fight against Communism. Some believed that Hitler was “recognized by the Holy Father.”[7] These beliefs, though, were held by the upper ranks of the Catholic hierarchy. Local priests despised Nazism, and even dared to insult Hitler when making critiques about his leadership. He was not a deity; he was not someone who people should put their faith in. Not only was Hitler’s leadership criticized, but the lower ranks simply thought the Nazi Party was untrustworthy, and a threat to the state. Their critiques went largely ignored. Hitler continued to show some ‘support’ for Germany’s churches. Thanks to the imagery of his cult, no one caught up in his new ‘religion’ would ever believe that he could lie about “his professions of support for the Churches.”[8]

This chapter can only serve as a reminder of how a leader can sway the views of the public though spirituality. Weber’s post-revolution France allowed for the French to leave the church and believe in a spirituality, while Hitler’s glorified speeches persuaded Germans to further believe in the developing cult. How would Hitler’s cult have continued to grow if he had not placed spiritual overtones in his speeches to the masses? Did Mussolini himself use these spiritual tactics in his own regime; will this be a theme encountered when the chosen works on Fascist Italy are discussed later in the semester, or is this ‘spirituality for the state’ only common to Nazi Germany?

Many happy returns,

-Kate

(works cited below)

[1] Ian Kershaw, The ‘Hitler Myth’: Image and Reality in the Third Reich (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1987), 3.

[2] Kershaw, The ‘Hitler Myth,’ 106.

[3] Kershaw, The ‘Hitler Myth,’ 107.

[4] Kershaw, The ‘Hitler Myth,’ 107.

[5] Kershaw, The ‘Hitler Myth,’ 108.

[6] Kershaw, The ‘Hitler Myth,’ 108.

[7] Kershaw, The ‘Hitler Myth,’ 113.

[8] Kershaw, The ‘Hitler Myth,’ 120.