Hitler's Arguments Against Exceptionalism

The intentionalist view point is the belief that Hitler had planned for total eradication of not only the Jewish people but of anyone that posed a threat to the Aryan race. This included people such as the disabled, anyone of non-Aryan decent, and even communists. This was apparent with his political stances. Hitler being the Führer had complete control over the German government. With this power he was able to start the Holocaust. Hitler was a very good political speaker, with this is helped him to rally the German people to his cause and make them not question what he was doing was wrong. This only helps the intentionalists view that Hitler orchestrated the entire thing and that the final solution had been there since the beginning of the war. Hitler has deep …show more content…
Are actions taken place a product of a previous ideology, or are they the stepping stones to building a plan. Each side could argue one way or the other. Actions I believe are direct results of a plan, while there are incidents in everyday life that you just take action, without having everything figured out before, major events are planned out. These plans are then carried out by the actions in order to achieve the ultimate goal of the plan. This helps to strengthen the institutionalist’s view of the final solution. If the ultimate goal was total eradication of the Jewish people, then we can see a correlation between the war and the final solution. On the other side of the debate they argue that the events or “actions” that took place during the war influenced Hitler into coming up with the final solution. With this view point we can conclude that the actions taken during the war were just that, actions. These actions have no significance towards the final solution, but the outcome of these actions and the situations forcing the actions to take place instead are what led to the final