1. The Lake, the Villa, the Meeting Analysis

2. Theories There are three main theories when examining the Holocaust that are highlighted in the Lake, the Villa, the Meeting.

3. The Intentionalist Theory This theory is based on the evidence of Hitler’s speeches and Mein Kampf (as well as other evidence). This theory is based on the evidence of Hitler’s speeches and Mein Kampf (as well as other evidence). It looks at the ‘clarity of his plans and the control over both people and events’ (pg. 4) It looks at the ‘clarity of his plans and the control over both people and events’ (pg. 4) He is seen in this theory as a man who always intended on a genocidal plan. He is seen in this theory as a man who always intended on a genocidal plan.

4. Structuralist Theory This theory looks less at Hitler and more at his subordinates like Heydrich (see opposite). It refers to the ‘chaotic political system that tipped the regime over the edge’ (pg 4). In essence this looks at the gradual escalation of a genocidal policy that is dominated by departmental actions rather than centrally planned.

5. Moderate Functionalists This basically is the creation of a less polarized view – the middle ground. This basically is the creation of a less polarized view – the middle ground. These Historians examine Hitler as someone not in full control over the Jewish policy but who in the end was in overall command and did have the final say. These Historians examine Hitler as someone not in full control over the Jewish policy but who in the end was in overall command and did have the final say.

6. Question: When did the ‘Jewish Question’ become Genocide? Was it when Hitler first put pen to paper in Mein Kampf? Was it when Hitler first put pen to paper in Mein Kampf? Was it when Hitler invaded Poland in September 1939? Was it when Hitler invaded Poland in September 1939? Was it when Hitler invaded Russia in 1941? Was it when Hitler invaded Russia in 1941? Was it at the Wannsee Meeting? Was it at the Wannsee Meeting?

7. Mein Kampf – Blueprint for genocide? Examine Hitler’s language in Mein Kampf and it is full of anti Semitic language. But is it a blueprint to murder? Examine Hitler’s language in Mein Kampf and it is full of anti Semitic language. But is it a blueprint to murder? According to Roseman he does talk about ‘extermination’ but Roseman asks you to consider the idea of Hitler thinking about this and whether he really believed it was possible. According to Roseman he does talk about ‘extermination’ but Roseman asks you to consider the idea of Hitler thinking about this and whether he really believed it was possible. Did he intend fantasy to become a reality? Did he intend fantasy to become a reality? In 1924 it is doubtful he knew how much power he would have in 1941, therefore the answer has to be it was the ramblings of a fantasist. In 1924 it is doubtful he knew how much power he would have in 1941, therefore the answer has to be it was the ramblings of a fantasist. One must also question the very word extermination – did he mean extermination or was it in another context? Was there such a case for mass murder in the past for him to draw on? One must also question the very word extermination – did he mean extermination or was it in another context? Was there such a case for mass murder in the past for him to draw on?

8. Mein Kampf – Blueprint for genocide? Pg. 7-9 If not, then whilst Hitler’s plans do seem awfully telling of his future plans they do not represent the genocidal policy. If not, then whilst Hitler’s plans do seem awfully telling of his future plans they do not represent the genocidal policy. This therefore can be seen as a blow to the intentionalist argument. This therefore can be seen as a blow to the intentionalist argument.

9. Mein Kampf – Blueprint for genocide? Pg. 7-9 If not, then whilst Hitler’s plans do seem awfully telling of his future plans they do not represent the genocidal policy. If not, then whilst Hitler’s plans do seem awfully telling of his future plans they do not represent the genocidal policy. This therefore can be seen as a blow to the intentionalist argument. This therefore can be seen as a blow to the intentionalist argument.

10. Deportations and Anti Jewish Policy Pg. 9-11 How does Roseman explain the anti Jewish policies of the 1930s? Roseman points to the gradual escalation of anti Jewish actions up to Kristallnacht – does this lead to the germs of a genocidal policy? Not according to Roseman.

11. The polices Hitler and the Nazi Party actioned were creating a Jew free state – not a genocidal policy. Key to this according to Roseman is the creation of special centres that ‘facilitate’ Jewish emigration (see pg. 10) The polices Hitler and the Nazi Party actioned were creating a Jew free state – not a genocidal policy. Key to this according to Roseman is the creation of special centres that ‘facilitate’ Jewish emigration (see pg. 10) This according to Roseman makes no sense if the Nazi regime is trying to keep Jews in order to kill them. This according to Roseman makes no sense if the Nazi regime is trying to keep Jews in order to kill them. Roseman dictates that the Nazi party’s principal goal was the elimination of the Jewish influence in Germany. Roseman dictates that the Nazi party’s principal goal was the elimination of the Jewish influence in Germany. Therefore the question has to be asked how did this lead to Wannsee and the need for fifteen men to talk about mass murder? Therefore the question has to be asked how did this lead to Wannsee and the need for fifteen men to talk about mass murder?

12. The men at Wannsee (pg.11 - 17 Willing obedient servants or people building ‘empires’? Willing obedient servants or people building ‘empires’? The relationship between their actions in the 1930s and the genocide they created according to Roseman ‘ a syndrome of eager subordination’ (pg 11). The relationship between their actions in the 1930s and the genocide they created according to Roseman ‘ a syndrome of eager subordination’ (pg 11). Roseman highlights the way in which some historians point to the need for Hitler’s subordinates to grab for power and prestige. Thus this creates policy drift with neither a goal or guiding hand to help them. Roseman highlights the way in which some historians point to the need for Hitler’s subordinates to grab for power and prestige. Thus this creates policy drift with neither a goal or guiding hand to help them. However Roseman point to the nature of the Nazi government and Hitler’s style of leadership as being of intrinsic importance to this. Did he want the ‘vagueness’ of the system in order to allow the grassroots of the party to kick and shout at their lack of power. (Pg. 11) However Roseman point to the nature of the Nazi government and Hitler’s style of leadership as being of intrinsic importance to this. Did he want the ‘vagueness’ of the system in order to allow the grassroots of the party to kick and shout at their lack of power. (Pg. 11)

13. If Hitler was an intentionalist why Roseman asks are the Nuremberg laws not radical? If Hitler was an intentionalist why Roseman asks are the Nuremberg laws not radical? Answer – they were last minute and an ad hoc to the moment. The same can be said for the actions of Kristallnacht – not of Hitler’s doing but rather Goebbels. Answer – they were last minute and an ad hoc to the moment. The same can be said for the actions of Kristallnacht – not of Hitler’s doing but rather Goebbels. What of the main players to Wannsee? What of the main players to Wannsee? Heydrich obviously according to Roseman is a key player. ‘Power-hungry’ but Roseman point out in pages 12 –13 that Hitler was the dominate leading force in all polices either by his actions or inactions. Heydrich obviously according to Roseman is a key player. ‘Power-hungry’ but Roseman point out in pages 12 –13 that Hitler was the dominate leading force in all polices either by his actions or inactions. Roseman looks at men like Heydrich as the refining and reshaping forces of Hitler’s aims. Their ‘energetic participation’ could be said to be critical in this issue. Roseman looks at men like Heydrich as the refining and reshaping forces of Hitler’s aims. Their ‘energetic participation’ could be said to be critical in this issue. Roseman (Pg.15) asks why so many people took up the war against Jews. Anti Semitism is key as well as the birth of the radical right and the growth of nationalism following the demise of the Weimar Republic. Roseman (Pg.15) asks why so many people took up the war against Jews. Anti Semitism is key as well as the birth of the radical right and the growth of nationalism following the demise of the Weimar Republic.

14. Heroic Realism/Ideology – pg. 17 Heydrich and his staff were the young men that exemplified the post war radical right. Was it ideology that dominated their objectives? Heydrich and his staff were the young men that exemplified the post war radical right. Was it ideology that dominated their objectives? According to Roseman it was deeper than that – ‘Heroic Realism’ not ideology was their creed. This meant that it was more destructive and lends itself well to all three theories! According to Roseman it was deeper than that – ‘Heroic Realism’ not ideology was their creed. This meant that it was more destructive and lends itself well to all three theories! Intentionalist – Hitler by his use of such men surely new they’d create a policy he could sanction. Intentionalist – Hitler by his use of such men surely new they’d create a policy he could sanction. Structuralist – That these men with their beliefs would foster a policy along their beliefs as opposed to direct orders. Structuralist – That these men with their beliefs would foster a policy along their beliefs as opposed to direct orders. Moderate Functionalist – That their beliefs with Hitler’s leadership style would create the genocide. Moderate Functionalist – That their beliefs with Hitler’s leadership style would create the genocide.

15. The road ahead – signposts (pg 18-20) If the Nazi objectives were to rid Germany (and Europe) of Jewish influence, but not to carry out murder then there are signs to show that this policy was being fractured. If the Nazi objectives were to rid Germany (and Europe) of Jewish influence, but not to carry out murder then there are signs to show that this policy was being fractured. There were discussions relating to forced deportations – Eastern Europe or Africa. There were discussions relating to forced deportations – Eastern Europe or Africa. The language being used in speeches became more aggressive towards Jews as war loomed closer – was Hitler giving a warning? The language being used in speeches became more aggressive towards Jews as war loomed closer – was Hitler giving a warning? Whatever the signs were, the road was changing its path. Whatever the signs were, the road was changing its path.