1. Gleichschaltung – the consolidation of society under Nazi control
Local government – power
centralised under Nazi
control
Repression of opponents through
terror and acts of law
All opposing political parties
banned by July 1933
Local state govs. abolished
March 1933; powers assumed
by Nazis in Berlin
Civil and political
liberties suspended
by ‘For the
Protection of the
People and State’
decree, March 1933
First concentration camp
under SS control at
Dachau, March 1933
Trade unions banned;
replaced by the German
Labour Front, May 1933
Jews and political
opponents removed
from the Civil
Service, April 1933
Law Against the
Formation of Parties,
July 1933
Night of the Long
Knives – SA leaders
and other opponents
eliminated; June 1934
State governors appointed
to run each state; responsible
directly to Berlin
Upper House of the
Reichstag abolished
1934
Hitler assumes both offices
President and Chancellor as
‘Fuhrer’ – Aug. 1934
Armed forces oath of
personal loyalty to
Hitler, Aug. 1934
Plebiscite held (Nov. 1934)
on Hitler’s new powers: 90%
vote in favour (43m votes)

2. David Low’s sardonic comment in 1934 on the Night of the Long Knives

3. WAS HITLER ABSOLUTE MASTER OF GERMANY?
The idea that Hitler was the all-powerful dictator of Germany from 1933 onwards does not stand up to analysis.
His authority – up to 1938, at least – was limited by a variety of factors: his largely lazy, sometimes indecisive character, the influence of the elites who helped to put him in power, opposition elements inside the Nazi Party (up to 1934)the Christian Churches; the civil service.
Hitler’s power was limited between 1933 and 1934
Hitler was able to establish a powerful dictatorship by August 1934 and absolute power by the end of 1938
His personal authority was not seriously challenged until the last days of the Second World War. Throughout this period he was the source of all key decisions on matters of policy and ideology.

4. WHAT ARE THE DIFFERENT INTERPRETATIONS OF THE NAZI PERIOD?
The Intentionalists: Intentionalist historians support the traditional view of the Hitler dictatorship. This sees Hitler as a strong dictator who controlled the Nazi state and subordinates as he wished ( or as he intended). He achieved this by a policy of ‘divide and rule’ of his subordinates – making them compete against each other for his approval and support. Divided in this way, they could not challenge his supreme authority.
The Structuralists: Structuralist historians argue against the view of Hitler as the all-powerful ruler in a well-ordered Nazi Germany. They argue that Hitler’s rule was chaotic and confused because he avoided making day-to-day decisions, and left these to his subordinates. His authority was limited by the need to win the support of powerful groups such as businessmen, army leaders, or by the existing structures of society, such as the Christian Churches. They argue that Hitler was ‘a weak dictator.’
Conclusion: there is no doubting Hitler’s huge personal authority and power during the Nazi period but Hitler had to operate in a political situation in which compromises and limits on that authority were inevitable – as they are for any ruler or political leader.