An evaluation of two primary sources in Nazi Germany Essay

An evaluation of two primary sources in Nazi Germany - Essay Example Goebells can be trusted to paint an accurate and reliable picture of the Ministry’s aims. Goebbels was knowledgeable on the media/manipulating press, in the full speech Goebbels points out that he is ‘from the press’2 and goes on to say that he wants the press to be involved in the ministry. Goebbels is persuasive, he claims alignment to the press, suggesting he’s one of them; then stresses the high importance and value of their role; essentially bolstering the troops and thus he comes across as an informed authority on the subject. The speech is represented slightly differently in different textbooks; presumably due to the translation from German to English. Whereas the Noakes and Pridham version says: ‘work on people until they have capitulated to us’3 – the David Welch version says: ‘work on people until they are addicted to us.’4 There is a subtle difference in meaning between these two translations, the first suggesting surrender, the latter suggesting devoted, and this must be borne in mind when interpreting the source. The final line of the document gobbet states: ‘tell the masses what they want,’5 this applies Antonio Gramsci’s term ‘hegemony,’ whereby the masses of society give their consent to the ‘direction imposed on social life by the dominant fundamental group.’6 It’s highly significant to the way in which propaganda works and influences. Goebbels is keen to make the distinction between enlightenment and propaganda, by defining propaganda in more positive terms as being active, something that persuades people to believe; whereby enlightenment is more of a passive process. The source has a wider significance when the events that occurred afterward are considered in hindsight. In March 1933 the Nazi’s were beginning to gain a political foothold, they’d achieved 288 seats, but had still failed to win a majority vote7. Propaga nda was intended to forge Nationalism, so that people would put aside any other separate defining social groups such as class or religion and instead focus upon the Nation. Goebbels was effective in setting up and directing the Nazi propaganda Ministry. In Goebbels’ speech he talks of wanting to put across propaganda in a current fashionable manner, radio was a key factor in this. Dr. Brian Currid in his chapter called ‘Radio, Mass Publicity and National Fantasy’ explains how German radio had begun 10yrs earlier than Goebells article, in 19238, and at that time mostly consisted of music and songs. Currid charts the change or reform of radio’s usage by the Nazis into something nationalized and states: ‘After the so-called Gleichschaltung, or consolidation, of the radio – the power of the Nazis to manipulate public opinion had reached unimaginable heights seemingly overnight.’9 Nanny Dreschler also suggests that the radio meant that †˜indoctrination and entertainment [could] be extended into the private sphere without difficulty.’10 On the 30th June, following Goebell’s speech, Hitler himself gave a speech which is a very similar source. This served to corroborate the Nazi party’s stance and lend support to Goebells, stating that as Minister, Goebell’s was: ‘responsible for all influences on the intellectual life of the nation, public relations for state culture’11 The second source is a local newspaper report from March 16 1934, a primary source from the time of the events