Historians have disagreed about how far Hitler was responsible for the Holocaust.
What is your view about how far Hitler was responsible for the Holocaust?
Intentionalists view that path to Auschwitz and the massacre of the Jewry as a ‘straight road’, seeing
Adolf Hitler as the sole instigator of the event and as the main fountain from which the anti-Semitic
actions of the Nazi regime spilled forth, while functionalists claim that the responsibility of the
holocaust lies with numerous other perpetrators, such as the bureaucracy, the architect of genocide
Himmler, and the ordinary German people. This essay attempts to review some of the key
historiography regarding this debate. Lucy Dawidowicz believes that without Hitler, the Holocaust
would not have occurred. However, Hans Mommsen, a functionalist claims that the pogrom cannot
be solely attributed to Hitler as there were other culprits such as Himmler and Eichmann who
collaborated with Hitler to plan the Holocaust. Whilst historian Daniel Goldhagen asserts that the
responsibility for the Holocaust can be blamed on the ordinary Germans.
Hitler associated the Jews with Bolshevism and socialism, where he merged his hatred of the Jews
with his own anti-Marxism. He even blamed the Jews for Germany’s military defeat in world war one,
stating that the Jews were culprits of the imperial Germany’s downfall. Dawidowicz maintains that
the Final Solution was not a random or incidental happening but rather the ‘centrepiece’ of the Nazi
ideology. She also believes that Hitler had always desired and intended the annihilation of the Jews,
and that the major policies of the Nazis in regards to the Jewish population were a result of his own
aspirations. Hence, she believes Hitler was the ringleader of the Holocaust. Dawidowicz argues that
‘Hitler planned to enforce a mass-exodus of the Jews from Germany’ 1. She insists Hitler had always
been fixated on the total annihilation of the Jewish race. Her argument is supported by a number of
passages in Hitler’s autobiography Mein Kampf and his warning to the Reichstag: ‘if the Jewish
financers outside Europe should succeed in plunging the nations once more into a world war, then
the result will not be in bolshevization of the earth, thus the victory of the Jewry, but the annihilation
of the Jewish race in Europe’2. This piece of evidence suggests that Hitler had always insisted on a
definitive violent solution to the Jewish question which suggests mass murder. But, despite this
evidence provided, it’s important to recognise that one of the most evident criticisms of the
intentionalist argument relates to difficulties experienced in terms of proving that Hitler’s genocidal
intentions were solely responsible for the Holocaust. This is because the lack of decisive evidence
leads to a more vague interpretation of Hitler’s intentions, as it is pivotal to demonstrate a link
between his view of the Jewish people and his genocidal intentions because without which the
argument is therefore futile. One of the most evident criticisms of the intentionalist argument relates
to difficulties experienced in terms of proving that Hitler’s genocidal intentions were solely
responsible for the Holocaust. Breitman argues that it is incorrect to look generally at Hitler’s political
ideology prior to WWII. In this case, evidence with speeches made during the war regarding the
destruction of the Jews, and then claim that this is direct evidence of Hitler’s intentions. Brietman
suggests that this is too broad a view, and does not allow for a nuanced examination of other aspects
of Hitler’s asserted intentions including relocation of Jews. Hence the statement by Dawidowicz is
controversial because in the speech she quotes it is likely that Hitler was using the Jewish people as
hostage, to prevent the USA from entering a possible world war. Dawidowicz’s approach relied upon
evidence from Mein Kampf and speeches. But these anti – Semitic outpourings were more often
designed to appeal to a right wing audience rather than meant as statements of intent from Hitler.
According to the Anti-Defamation League chairman Abe Foxman, Mein Kampf is unreliable and
1 Lucy S Dawidowicz, The war against the Jews, 1933-1945, New York, 2010, Open Road Integrated Media
page 44
2 Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, translation of the unexpurgated edition of "Mein Kampf"
was first published on March 21st, 1939 page 303
Hana Noori
Word count: 4002
What is your view about how far Hitler was responsible for the Holocaust?
Intentionalists view that path to Auschwitz and the massacre of the Jewry as a ‘straight road’, seeing
Adolf Hitler as the sole instigator of the event and as the main fountain from which the anti-Semitic
actions of the Nazi regime spilled forth, while functionalists claim that the responsibility of the
holocaust lies with numerous other perpetrators, such as the bureaucracy, the architect of genocide
Himmler, and the ordinary German people. This essay attempts to review some of the key
historiography regarding this debate. Lucy Dawidowicz believes that without Hitler, the Holocaust
would not have occurred. However, Hans Mommsen, a functionalist claims that the pogrom cannot
be solely attributed to Hitler as there were other culprits such as Himmler and Eichmann who
collaborated with Hitler to plan the Holocaust. Whilst historian Daniel Goldhagen asserts that the
responsibility for the Holocaust can be blamed on the ordinary Germans.
Hitler associated the Jews with Bolshevism and socialism, where he merged his hatred of the Jews
with his own anti-Marxism. He even blamed the Jews for Germany’s military defeat in world war one,
stating that the Jews were culprits of the imperial Germany’s downfall. Dawidowicz maintains that
the Final Solution was not a random or incidental happening but rather the ‘centrepiece’ of the Nazi
ideology. She also believes that Hitler had always desired and intended the annihilation of the Jews,
and that the major policies of the Nazis in regards to the Jewish population were a result of his own
aspirations. Hence, she believes Hitler was the ringleader of the Holocaust. Dawidowicz argues that
‘Hitler planned to enforce a mass-exodus of the Jews from Germany’ 1. She insists Hitler had always
been fixated on the total annihilation of the Jewish race. Her argument is supported by a number of
passages in Hitler’s autobiography Mein Kampf and his warning to the Reichstag: ‘if the Jewish
financers outside Europe should succeed in plunging the nations once more into a world war, then
the result will not be in bolshevization of the earth, thus the victory of the Jewry, but the annihilation
of the Jewish race in Europe’2. This piece of evidence suggests that Hitler had always insisted on a
definitive violent solution to the Jewish question which suggests mass murder. But, despite this
evidence provided, it’s important to recognise that one of the most evident criticisms of the
intentionalist argument relates to difficulties experienced in terms of proving that Hitler’s genocidal
intentions were solely responsible for the Holocaust. This is because the lack of decisive evidence
leads to a more vague interpretation of Hitler’s intentions, as it is pivotal to demonstrate a link
between his view of the Jewish people and his genocidal intentions because without which the
argument is therefore futile. One of the most evident criticisms of the intentionalist argument relates
to difficulties experienced in terms of proving that Hitler’s genocidal intentions were solely
responsible for the Holocaust. Breitman argues that it is incorrect to look generally at Hitler’s political
ideology prior to WWII. In this case, evidence with speeches made during the war regarding the
destruction of the Jews, and then claim that this is direct evidence of Hitler’s intentions. Brietman
suggests that this is too broad a view, and does not allow for a nuanced examination of other aspects
of Hitler’s asserted intentions including relocation of Jews. Hence the statement by Dawidowicz is
controversial because in the speech she quotes it is likely that Hitler was using the Jewish people as
hostage, to prevent the USA from entering a possible world war. Dawidowicz’s approach relied upon
evidence from Mein Kampf and speeches. But these anti – Semitic outpourings were more often
designed to appeal to a right wing audience rather than meant as statements of intent from Hitler.
According to the Anti-Defamation League chairman Abe Foxman, Mein Kampf is unreliable and
1 Lucy S Dawidowicz, The war against the Jews, 1933-1945, New York, 2010, Open Road Integrated Media
page 44
2 Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, translation of the unexpurgated edition of "Mein Kampf"
was first published on March 21st, 1939 page 303
Hana Noori
Word count: 4002
