80 pages • 2 hours read
William L. ShirerA modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.
Chapter 1 opens with a brief description of the scene in Berlin on the days leading up to January 30, 1933, when Adolf Hitler was sworn in as Chancellor of Germany and the “Thousand-Year Reich” was born (5). The remainder of the chapter focuses on Hitler’s family background, early life, and political education as a young man living in Vienna.
Alois Hitler, the future dictator’s father, went by the name “Alois Schicklgruber” until 1876, when paternity- and inheritance-related questions required that he adopt the name “Heidler,” misspelled as “Hitler” on his revised baptismal certificate. Alois married Klara Poelzl, his second cousin and 23 years his junior. Their son Adolf was born on April 20, 1889, in the Austrian town of Braunau-am-Inn, just across the border from the German state of Bavaria. In later years, Adolf Hitler rarely mentioned his upbringing. Mein Kampf reveals that young Hitler rebelled against his father, who wanted his son to follow him into civil service. In fact, young Adolf Hitler earned poor grades in high school, seems to have been repulsed by the idea of working for a living in the traditional way, and hoped instead to become an artist.
In 1909, 20-year-old Adolf Hitler moved to the Austrian capital of Vienna, where he languished in poverty and obscurity until the eve of World War I. His Vienna experience intensified his bitterness but also deepened his fascination with politics, which, thanks to a favorite high-school history teacher, had long since captured his interest. He observed the mistakes of Austria’s Pan-German Nationalist Party, whose ideas he supported but whose leaders failed either to arouse the masses or to win allies among the powerful. He learned that audiences responded favorably to his own oratory. Finally, he developed a virulent antisemitism that corrupted him and shaped his behavior for the rest of his life.
Chapter 2 describes Hitler’s experiences during World War I and immediately afterward, when he became the seventh member of a fringe organization in Munich known as the German Workers’ Party.
Hitler’s pre-war experiences in Vienna had made him a fanatical German nationalist. He hated the fact that political borders separated Germany proper from the German-speaking peoples of Central and Eastern Europe. As a soldier in the trenches, he was a unique character, for he never drank, smoked, or talked about women, nor did he receive letters or presents from home. He appeared single-minded in his determination to fight for Germany. In combat, he earned the prestigious Iron Cross and rose to the rank of corporal. When the war ended, he was recovering from a gas attack that left him temporarily blinded. He “wept” at the news of Germany’s surrender (29).
After the war, Hitler and millions of Germans came to believe that they had been betrayed by politicians at home rather than vanquished on the battlefield. In Munich, which attracted thousands of disgruntled veterans and others who hated Germany’s new Weimar Republic, Hitler stumbled across the German Workers’ Party, whose members impressed him with ideas similar to his own. Hitler joined the party and steered it toward national socialism. The party adopted a formal program calling for pan-German unity. On April 1, 1920, its leaders changed the organization’s name to “National Socialist German Workers’ Party” (“NSDAP” in German, or “Nazi”). Hitler personally selected the swastika as the party’s emblem. As the Nazi Party grew in numbers, its rowdiest street thugs formed a paramilitary group called the SA (Sturmabteilung), which shouted down rival speakers and terrorized other parties’ political meetings. By 1921, the Nazi Party already included many who would become infamous in later years: Hermann Goering, Ernst Roehm, Rudolf Hess, Julius Streicher, Alfred Rosenberg, and others. Hitler, however, had become the dictatorial party leader, its Fuehrer.
Chapter 3 explains the political situation in post-war Germany during a five-year period of turmoil that culminated in the Nazi’s ill-fated Beer Hall Putsch of November 1923.
After World War I, Germany’s new Weimar Republic boasted a constitution as nominally democratic as any in the world. The Republic, however, received only lukewarm support from the old Prussian Army officer corps, whose ancient ideas and habits clashed with republican values. Meanwhile, many Germans resented what they viewed as the unduly harsh terms of the 1919 Treaty of Versailles, which forced Germany to pay reparations to the victorious Allies and assume full responsibility for the war. In 1921-22, Germany experienced hyper-inflation. Meanwhile, French forces occupied the Ruhr industrial region. The Weimar Republic became the “scapegoat” for these ills (62). Political radicals hoped to capitalize on the Republic’s weakness.
In Munich, General Erich Ludendorff, former leader of the Army High Command, lent his name and credibility to ultra-nationalist malcontents. Bavaria appeared poised for possible secession and a showdown with republican forces in Berlin over the future of the Weimar Republic. General Hans von Seeckt, Commander of the Army, threatened to crush the Bavarian revolt in its infancy. Fearing that the nationalists would lose their nerve and squander the moment, Hitler ordered his Nazis to seize the Buergerbraukeller, a Munich beer hall, and take hostages, including Bavarian State Commissioner Gustav von Kahr. Hitler meant to inaugurate his National Socialist Revolution. Kahr, however, could not be persuaded to join the Nazi revolt. Ludendorff and Hitler then led a march on the War Ministry, but the police blocked their way while soldiers surrounded the Nazi’s SA thugs. Shots were fired, and the Nazis scattered. Their leaders, including Hitler, were tried and convicted of treason. Hitler served only nine months in prison. The Beer Hall Putsch made him “a national figure” (78).
Chapter 4 departs from the book’s chronological narrative and offers an analysis of the Third Reich’s historical and ideological contexts.
While imprisoned in 1924, Hitler dictated much of Mein Kampf, an autobiographical screed that became Nazism’s sacred text. Mein Kampf amounts to a “blueprint of the Third Reich,” for Hitler explains exactly what he will do when he comes to power (81). In short, he plans to consolidate all German-speaking peoples into a new German empire united by race. Because he believed ethnic Germans represent the world’s “master race,” they must have Lebensraum (“living space”). Hitler promises to acquire Lebensraum at the expense of Germany’s Slavic neighbors to the east, who, along with the Jews, he saw as fit only for enslavement or expulsion.
Hitler’s obsession with race, coupled with his glorification of struggle, constitutes a perverse blend of Darwinism and sadism that has deep roots in the German past. From Martin Luther through Otto von Bismarck, German history presents one long scene of dominance and submission (Luther rebelled against the Catholic Church but not against the secular authorities). Hundreds of feudal lords ruled as petty tyrants. Meanwhile, Prussian militarists, backed by the aristocratic Junker class, helped smother liberalism in Bismarck’s Second Reich. These developments were nothing more than the political manifestation of a much broader and deeply authoritarian German worldview, represented in philosophy and culture by Hegel, Nietzsche, Wagner, and many others.
Two writers stand above all others as philosophers of Nazism and intellectual architects of the Third Reich, and neither, ironically, was German. The first, Count Joseph Arthur de Gobineau, was a Frenchman who, in the 1850s, published a four-volume Essay on the Inequality of the Human Races, which describes all history in racial terms and insists that the “jewel of the white race was the Aryan” (103). The second, Houston Stewart Chamberlain, an Englishman, was a prolific-yet-erratic writer who became the “spiritual founder” of Nazi Germany (108). In Foundations of the Nineteenth Century (1899), his most influential book, Chamberlain follows Gobineau in arguing that all history amounts to racial struggle. Chamberlain also asserts that only two “pure races” remain: Jews and Germans, and in the latter he identifies the world’s best hope. Even Jesus, Chamberlain insists, was most likely an Aryan and not a Jew.
Chapters 1-4 introduce three of Shirer’s major arguments, all of which relate to the book’s broader themes. The first major argument involves Adolf Hitler’s personal and ideological influence on the Third Reich. From 1933 to 1945, Hitler functioned as both the embodiment of National Socialism and the totalitarian dictator of Nazi Germany. At its core, the Third Reich represented an attempt to unify Europe’s ethnic Germans into a racially “pure” empire and then expand this empire eastward, acquiring Lebensraum (“living space”) at the expense of supposed weaker “races” such as Jewish and Slavic people. Hitler’s formative years in Vienna, therefore, were crucial, for there he learned to despise the ethnic minorities that comprised the Austro-Hungarian Empire. Shirer summarizes:
It is only as an Austrian who came of age in the last decade before the collapse of the Hapsburg Empire, who failed to take root in its civilized capital, who embraced all the preposterous prejudices and hates then rife among its German-speaking extremists and who failed to grasp what was decent and honest and honorable in the vast majority of his fellow citizens, were they Czechs or Jews or Germans, poor or well off, artists or artisans, that Hitler can be understood (28).
As Hitler experienced what he perceived as failures of the German government in his younger years, he absorbed the strawman argument that these failures were not those of his own people but of those he believed to be “weaker races,” who he (and others) felt must be removed from power and replaced with their superiors who can lead with strength and national pride.
The second major argument to appear in these first four chapters is that Germany’s Weimar Republic (1919-1933), the nation’s first experiment in liberal democracy, faced so many enemies from so many different directions that it stood little chance of success. Chief among the Republic’s detractors were the members of the Prussian-dominated Army officer corps. Here Shirer also introduces an important geographical context. While the Weimar Republic’s supporters concentrated in Berlin, Bavaria—the largest state in southern Germany—remained largely under the control of the German Army, whose officers hated democracy and longed for a restoration of the monarchy.
In fact, Bavaria became a magnet for all of Germany’s anti-republicans. It was in Munich, the Bavarian capital, that Hitler joined that “weird assortment of misfits who founded National Socialism” (38). The original Nazi Party platform constituted an odd mixture of nationalism and socialism, ideologies that appealed to different kinds of radicals for very different reasons. Some nationalists, for instance, believe that political communities are held together by ethnic, historical, and cultural ties. Many socialists, on the other hand, argue that people are united less by ethnicity than by economic interests, which is why many early Nazis hailed from the working class. Hitler deliberately shaped the Nazi Party platform to appeal to the poor and resentful, though in later years, while courting wealthy German industrialists and financiers, he would find the socialist elements of his movement “embarrassing” (41). Either way, extreme nationalists and extreme socialists alike sought to destroy the Weimar Republic.
This second major argument, which highlights the strength of anti-republican sentiment across different sectors of German society, bears a direct relation to the book’s most sweeping theme: Nazism as the Logical Continuation of German History. According to this interpretation, the Prussian-dominated Army officers were not merely aristocrats and monarchists at heart, as officers in other European societies also tended to be. Furthermore, Germany’s working-class radicals were not merely traumatized by World War I and embittered by economic privation, as working-class radicals across Europe certainly were. Instead, these anti-republicans were the products of a four-centuries-old German history defined, at least to a large extent, by antisemitism and authoritarianism.
Finally, a third major argument is that nothing Hitler did from 1933 to 1945 should have surprised anyone. This casts partial blame for the Third Reich on both the German people and the wider world. In Mein Kampf, Hitler explained exactly what he would do if he ever acquired power. Many devoted Nazis told Shirer that even they had difficulty getting through the entire book, which Shirer and most readers regard as the tedious ramblings of a narcissistic bigot. Nonetheless, the fact remains that in Mein Kampf Hitler made no attempt to conceal his ideas or his intentions. Shirer notes that “had the foreign statesmen of the world perused it carefully while there was still time, both Germany and the world might have been saved from catastrophe” (81). In subsequent chapters, Shirer develops this argument at great length.
European History
View Collection
Good & Evil
View Collection
International Holocaust Remembrance Day
View Collection
Journalism Reads
View Collection
Memorial Day Reads
View Collection
Military Reads
View Collection
National Book Awards Winners & Finalists
View Collection
Politics & Government
View Collection
Sexual Harassment & Violence
View Collection
The Best of "Best Book" Lists
View Collection
War
View Collection
World War II
View Collection