The Nazi Fire: The Consensus View On The Fire

1113 Words3 Pages

On the 27th of February 1933 a fire broke out at the Reichstag burning down the building and leading to a sequence of events that would eventually result in Adolf Hitler gaining absolute power of Germany. Today I will be looking at the question that many historians have argued over ever since the event, who was responsible for the blaze?
The intentionalist view is that it was the Nazis, the Structualist view is it was the Communists, and the Consensus view blames van der Lubbe.
As a result of the fire, Hitler was able to get an ‘emergency degree’ from the Government this has lead led to some historians believing the fire was in fact a work of the Nazis in order for them to scare the government into handing them control.
So what reasons have …show more content…

As previously discussed the Nazis made van der Lubbe out to be a ‘dim witted, slobbering young man’, however historian Ian Kershaw claims he was ‘intelligent… unconnected with any political group’ and that he wished to ‘make a lone and spectacular act of defiant protest against the Nazi government’ (Kershaw, 1999). All this goes against the narrative the Nazi party spread; they wanted the public to think of van der Lubbe as a communist puppet that was too stupid to think for himself. The discrepancy in these two portrayals of van der Lubbe lead historians to this day to believe van der Lubbe was in fact mentally capable of this act, and the Nazis made it out like he wasn’t to more easily link him to the Communists. Some historians use van der Lubbe’s history with the Communist party as a way to blame the communists for the fire, however as van der Lubbe himself states ‘I was a member of the communist party until 1929’ (Spartacus Educational, 2016) he also claimed he ‘acted alone’ (Spartacus Educational, 2016). Some may say he was only saying this to cover for the Communists, but he also said negative things about the party, such as how the ‘Communist leaders lord it over the workers’ (Spartacus Educational, 2016), he would not have spoken so negatively towards the party had he been covering for them. The likeliness that van der Lubbe acted alone therefore is pretty firm, all the major points of contention such as his ‘dim-wittedness’ him being a Communist, him not having time to set the fire, and so on have all either been disproven, or at least proven to be not guarantees. In answer to the statement, ‘The Reichstag fire was a deliberate plot hatched by Hitler’s henchmen to help consolidate Nazi control over the political process’ although Hitler did get control over the political process as a direct result of the

Open Document